M1 Pacific Motorway extension to Raymond Terrace

This link from the M1 to the Pacific Highway is long overdue. It has been a terrible bottleneck in the major arterial road to the mid-coast, north coast and Queensland. This will save lives, reduce travel time and congestion.

We are concerned about impact on our land from flooding caused by your project.
Our access will be compromised.
Impact on flora and fauna in our area as most of the surrounding land is environmentally fragile.
We will be impacted from construction noise and construction restrictions on our travelling from farm to access roads whilst highway is being built and we are concerned about losing our access at completion of construction. We need to have assurances that our property and access will not be impacted by this project.
We have not been included in correspondence with NSW Planning and feel that we will be greatly impacted by proposed project.
We are a small farm and are greatly concerned that run off from construction and final road when it is raining will increase flooding on our property and slower drainage after flood events.

I would like make a submission in relation to the M1 bypass extension, specifically regarding the significant visual and acoustic impact to the nearby residents of Black Hill

Black Hill is a mostly rural/semi-rural suburb of the Newcastle LGA which comprises sections of farmland, native bushland, floodplain, agricultural and low-density Environmental Living-zoned residential areas. Prior to expansion of nearby industrial land in Beresfield and Thornton, Black Hill was considered entirely rural, and was coveted for its tranquil acreage and farmland settings within close proximity of the Newcastle and Maitland city limits.

The proposed freeway extension, whilst deemed necessary and beneficial, is likely to impact residents heavily during the lengthy construction period, and when completed.

From my residence at 18 Forsythe Parade, Black Hill, the New England Highway is visible in the distance (Photo 1), however due to the bare open low-lying floodplain that exists between the road and my residence, traffic is very audible at all hours of the day, and the heavy traffic that passes along the road 24 hours a day has a detrimental effect on the otherwise peaceful rural land that surrounds. Traffic on the existing M1 freeway which runs to the west of my residence is also clearly heard, and the older, smaller and fragmented sound barriers are in my view insufficient at reducing noise impact. The very recent removal of all vegetation from the median strip (seemingly without a benefit to safety or otherwise) has seemed to worsen the noise impact.

Construction of the M1 bypass and associated link roads, interchanges and flyovers, would bring the high volume national highway and its connections even closer to established homes and farms and significantly increase noise and visual impacts to residents that specifically chose this location for its low density rural setting, and the visual and acoustic privacy that comes with living in this environment. The peace and quiet that are so often the focus for many residents who chose this area to reside are unfortunately incompatible with the construction and existence of a nearby dual carriageway freeway.

Therefore I would like to propose some consideration be given to a generous extension of the proposed acoustic barriers so that they would run continuously along the southern side of the freeway from the Tarro interchange to the cut-in as the road begins to curve left (southbound) and becomes lower than the surrounding elevated landform. In attached Image 1, the section shows that vegetation has been deliberately kept low to provide floodplain views. In my opinion, provision of views for passing motorists does not outweigh the need to maintain visual and acoustic amenity for residents whose homes will be affected by the construction and operation of a major motorway. In addition to the blue line annotation for an acoustic barrier, an additional planted vegetation barrier (green annotation) would further shield noise and soften the appearance of the imposing concrete barriers. In Image 2, a red line has been overlaid on the image indicating the extent of the desired acoustic barrier along the Tarro stretch. In the earthworks cut at Black Hill, where sound and visual privacy are provided by the elevated natural bushland, acoustic barriers would not be required.

I would also request consideration that the acoustic barrier be reinstated along the entire eastern side of the existing freeway from the Lenaghans Drive turnoff to the Black Hill overpass, and possibly beyond. This would help shield residents of the suburb from noise from the existing M1, where traffic volumes have increased considerably since the freeway was first constructed, with currently insufficient wooden barriers that have aged and been superseded by improved designs and specifications (see Image 3 - red line indicating suggested extent of upgraded acoustic barrier). This could be achieved by large concrete acoustic barriers, as exist on the nearby Hunter Expressway, or generous dense vegetation zones adjacent to the roadway, or both. Not only would the barriers act to improve acoustic privacy to nearby residents, but they would also help to maintain the rural outlook that currently exists, instead of visually displeasing heavy volume vehicular traffic passing at all hours. The impact of traffic on visual amenity during night hours are just as displeasing given that car and truck lights would be constantly moving on an otherwise pitch black vista over the floodplains and farmland.

In summary, I feel that acoustic barriers in the form of concrete walls, and strategically planted thick vegetation buffers would minimise the sound and visual impact of traffic on the surrounding rural and residential land, given the flood plain allows very easy transference of sound and noise, and the lack of vegetation or natural landforms does not provide for any sound attenuation or insulation. The result is a very intrusive and disrupting noise environment from what is otherwise a relatively distant roadway.

I thank you for your consideration and welcome any further discussion or feedback regarding my suggestions.

I support the project but believe that the original off ramp into Tomago should be used. Old Punt rd that has now been outlined for use is not appropriate as it fails all traffic testing now…the original plan to follow easement land and join Tomago Rd near the Bowling Club makes more sense and would distribute the traffic better. There is plenty of room to put a big round a bout in, as mentioned this was the original plan when earlier displayed. Old punt rd and the round a bout at Tomago rd old pun5 rD does not handle and never has handled the traffic . There is no real possibility to widen where as a new off ramp road following the easement land allows for an appropriate road to b3 pu5 in

This should’ve done in the 1990’s

I have lived in the Black Hill area for a number of decades. As the surrounding area has grown so has the traffic and noise level, 24 hrs a day 7 days a week. I see there is a need for safer and more efficient roads.
The proposed extension would create a greater traffic flow and noise problem for our area. The existing sound barriers are not adequate in blocking any of the M1 traffic noise.
I would like to make a submission based on acoustic and visual amenity and request the existing wooden sound barriers along the M1 be removed and replaced with more effective large concrete barriers.
As traffic flow will continue to increase and the noise level also increases, it would be more cost effective to replace existing barriers with large concrete barriers that have a much longer life span. This cost effective aspect would also apply to the new upgrade being sound proofed by the larger concrete barriers.
Thank you for reading and considering my submission.
Your sincerely
Gwenda

Good Afternoon,
I would like make a submission in relation to the M1 bypass extension, specifically regarding the significant visual and acoustic impact to the nearby residents of Black Hill.

I have lived at Black Hill for over 20 years and the suburb is a mostly rural and semi-rural suburb of the Newcastle LGA comprised of farmland, native bush land, floodplain, agricultural and low-density Environmental Living-zoned residential areas. Prior to expansion of nearby industrial land in Beresfield and Thornton, Black Hill was considered entirely rural which is the reason we moved to the area because of it quiet acreages within close proximity to Newcastle and Maitland.

The proposed freeway extension, while it is necessary and beneficial, is likely to impact the Black Hill residents heavily during the lengthy construction period, and when it is completed.

We live at 13 Cahill Close Black Hill and have lived here before the M1 was constructed. However now due to the increased heavy traffic that travels along the M1, 24 hours a day 7 days a week, the traffic is very audible at all hours of the day and night and it has a detrimental effect on the otherwise peaceful homes and rural land. When the freeway was originally constructed smaller partial timber acoustic walls were installed, however they do not cover all the areas along the M1 where the homes are located and over the years they have deteriorated and pose a fire risk should there be a bush fire. These old timber walls are insufficient at reducing the continuing noise as was clearly heard from the recent night works to remove all of the vegetation from the median strip, it was weeks of incessant tree cutting and mulching during the night and it now seems that with their removal the noise coming from the M1 is worse than ever.

Construction of the M1 bypass and associated link roads, interchanges and flyovers, would bring the high volume national highway and its connections even closer to established homes and farms and significantly increase noise and visual impacts to residents, including ourselves that lived here before the M1. We specifically chose this location for its low density rural setting and the peace and quiet has been a focus for many residents who chose this area to live, now unfortunately this is incompatible with the construction and extension of a nearby dual carriageway freeway.

I would like to propose that an acoustic barrier be reinstated along the entire eastern side of the existing freeway from the Lenaghans Drive turnoff to the Black Hill overpass, and possibly beyond. This would help shield residents of the suburb from the noise from the existing M1, where traffic volumes have increased considerably since the freeway was first constructed, the current insufficient wooden barriers have aged and now been superseded by improved concrete designs. This could be achieved by replacing the timber walls with large concrete acoustic barriers and extending them on the M1 and along the Tarro extension, like those that exist on the nearby Hunter Expressway. Not only would the barriers act to improve the traffic acoustic to nearby residents they would also help to maintain the rural outlook that currently exists, instead of seeing the heavy volume of traffic passing at all hours. The impact of traffic during the night is just as displeasing because of the car and truck lights that would be constantly moving over the dark floodplains and farmland.

It would also be beneficial to extend the proposed acoustic barriers so that they would run continuously along the southern side of the freeway from the Tarro interchange to the cut-in as the road begins to curve left (southbound) and becomes lower than the surrounding elevated land. In many other motorways the concrete acoustic barriers provide a pleasing view for motorists as well as maintaining the visual and acoustic amenity for residents whose homes will be affected by the construction and operation of a major motorway.

In conclusion, I feel that acoustic barriers in the form of concrete walls should replace and extend past the old timber walls along the M1 and continue along the new M1 bypass extension. Strategically planted thick vegetation buffers would also minimize the sound and visual impact of traffic on the surrounding rural and residential land, given the flood plain allows very easy transference of sound and noise, and the lack of vegetation or natural land forms does not provide any sound buffer or insulation. Without the installation of concrete sound barriers the extension bypass is a very intrusive and disrupting noisy environment for what is otherwise a relatively distant and beneficial roadway.

I am a landowner of this parcel of land at Buchanan <15km from the proposed M1 extension to Raymond Terrace - https://roads-waterways.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects/01documents/road-construction-precast-facility/road-construction-precast-facility-ref-2016-12.pdf

I support the project.

However, I am opposed to another concrete pre-cast yard in the Hunter and the proposed identification of another pre-cast yard at Black-hill.

There appears to be no economic analysis undertaken to determine the viability of another yard. Not only are there other operations that can provide services needed to construct the projection, an additional concrete pre-cast yard would impact on the viability of existing operations and existing jobs at:
Buchanan
Teralba
Rutherford
Tomago

I suggest Chapter 5 Project Description, particularly Table 5-12 be amended to remove references to a pre-cast yard at Black-Hill, given that no economic analysis or viability has been undertaken. Instead the project description be amended to state:

During the tender process, the construction contract would determine the need for precast facilities, considering value for money, availability and proximity of alternate facilities to service the project.

Describe other facilities that are in the Hunter that may have potential to be used, including the site at Buchanan.

Refer upload

Please see attached letter.

After living in wonderful Tarro for over a decade I have been blessed to observe the wonderful birdlife in my vicinity. To an extent the current M1 through Hexham affords protection to small birds as it kills their main predators foxes and cats (I like cats and foxes). In a similar way with a little foresight I believe that the larger, magnificent birds of prey in Hexham can coexist with the overdue and welcome upgrade. I received email confirmation from two members of the Hunter Bird Observers Club that what I am talking about are Whistling Kites and Swamp Harriers, amongst others.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment and I will do what ever you ask of me to assist the careful intrusion of a major road into this gorgeous habitat for wildlife.

The M1Pacific Motorway ext to Raymond Terrace will have a crushing impact on my home and lifestyle, mostly due to flooding run off by the proposal now put forward. The sheer height of the fill being proposed across the Hexham Wetlands is 3 times more than the previous model, where is all of this water being displaced to? It will end up in my property and looking at the very flimsy drawings on the RMS website, it appears that they are removing the northern end of Purgatory Creek, which will cause the run off to dam up around the base of the road, allowing it to flood right near my home and animals. The proposal cuts across my property in the form of a bridge, however due to Covid, I have not been able to meet RMS only speak to Brad Parkes on the phone. When I asked Brad Parkes where the water is being directed off the brige and around the road, he really couldn't answer the question properly. I also asked how many bridge pylons would be on my property and where, as my property is on the EPA register for asbestos and not to be disturbed. I asked Brad Parkes what noise reducing solutions would be installed and his answer was none near my property. This project is ill thought out and very little detailed information is being made available. The information on the internet does not cover any of the information that I need in regard to flooding/noise or the impacts of construciton traffic and construction noise. There is no information being given about whether I will be able to survive the construction phase without being flooded out or sent around the twist by the influx of people/machinery. I have told the RMS on many occasions that I do not wish to vacate my home as there are no other properties where I have no neighbours, 15 minutes to Maitland or 20 minutes to Newcastle and very few cars on Woodlands Close. When Aurizon got the go ahead to build their facility at Hexham, you have allowed that development to push more flooding onto my property, which now stays on my property with nowhere to go, except evaporate. This has caused me a lot of stress and also I have to buy in hay all over winter for my cattle and horses and prior to Aurizon's development I did not have to buy in hay. This road/bridge development will probably ruin my chances at keeping any livestock and also not be stressed when we have long periods of rain. Due to the cost of insurance it is not possible to insure my home for flooding and with the RMS proposal there is an even larger chance of structural damage from flooding. I have asked the RMS previously to push this project further away from my home, but they brought it closer instead. The new Aurizon access road appears to be coming closer to my home also. I do not want to loose my access on or off the New England Hwy as it is very unclear from the dodgy photos on the projects website and I am unable to speak to the project team in person due to lockdown. I believe this project should be delayed until there is appropriate consultation with all landowners directly affected by it.

Koala Koalition EcoNetwork Port Stephens (KKEPS) submits that more can be done to conserve wild koalas in Port Stephens during the construction of this long-awaited infrastructure project. See recommendations in our submission attached.

I support this long-overdue infrastructure project, but it needs to be accompanied by more action to protect and enhance habitat for native wildlife, including the local koala population which is under extreme pressure from development. The proposed route of the M1 extension will unfortunately remove more than 50 hectares of koala habitat mainly in the Heatherbrae areas. To compensate, land parcels in the immediate area should be acquired and protected, having particular regard for wildlife movement corridors that (a) pass to the east of the new road and (b) cross the route corridor, linking to habitat closer to the centre of Raymond Terrace. Offsets on remote land are not an adequate substitute. More fauna fencing and more fauna crossings are also desirable.

Submission Attached

The Biodiversity Assessment Report attached to the EIS for the M1 extension concluded, ‘that the project is not expected to significantly impact the movements of koalas and no targeted connectivity measures are required for koalas.' However, a review of the EIS suggests that koalas may move away from the proposed Motorway.
There are two maps of the fauna corridor from Tomago to Heatherbrae ( EIS, Appendix I, pages 29 to 30). The corridor is adjacent to the proposed Motorway from Tomago to the Botanical Gardens. It then moves northeast away from the project footprint and goes through Masonite Road (Scotts, D. 2003).
Road construction noise and road traffic can startle nearby animals and cause a physiological stress response (Kight and Swaddle 2011). Consequently, animals may move away from the noise-effected area, either temporarily or permanently (Parris, K. 2015). Therefore, the disturbance caused by the M1 may result in animals migrating to the northeast, where they will need to cross Masonite Road. Consequently, a fauna protection fence on both sides of the road will prevent wildlife deaths. The fence should commence near the proposed Masonite Bridge and continue to the east side of the fauna corridor. Transport needs to consider installing escape structures such as wooden posts for long stretches of road, near crossings and at the end of fences. These posts will allow koalas to climb on and avoid predators (Environment, 2020). A fauna crossing should be constructed where the fauna corridor crosses Masonite Road on the east side of Heatherbrae. A fauna crossing will improve connectivity and give koalas on both sides of the road more opportunities to access koala habitat in the corridor. It will also save wildlife from vehicles strikes. Loss of koala habitat. The EIS claims that the project footprint would remove 56.3 hectares of potential koala habitat. Significant amounts of core koala habitat from land clearing and bush fires in Port Stephens has been lost over the past twenty years. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee reviewed the Port Stephens Koala Population in 2018. It gave the opinion that this population 'is facing a very high risk of extinction in NSW in the near future…’. (NSW Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2018). Therefore, this population is highly vulnerable to any threats, including loss of vegetation. The proposed strategies described in the EIS to offset the loss of habitat will not replace the loss of habitat in the construction footprint. Most biodiversity offsets have been issued, but the locations of the purchased offsets are not in the impacted areas. Two modest sized pieces of land have been purchased by Transport; however, the locations of these properties are unknown. Therefore the benefit of these properties as habitat is not clear.
Preserving vegetated corridors close to the impacted areas will ensure the genetic biodiversity of fauna and flora impacted by the project’s footprint. There are two pieces of land connected to the construction footprint with remnant vegetation and histories of koala sightings that could be used as offsets. One of these properties is owned by Transport, and the other is a private property on the market. Please view Figure 1 for the locations of each property in the attachment window. Securing this acreage for conservation will protect koalas from habitat loss.
The aerial photograph of the site for the Raymond Terrace Interchange shows a sectioned off piece of land with diagonal stripes. This land is attached to the Pacific Highway. The property has been described as 'project land owned by Transport’. (Figure 14-6, Map 8 of 8, page 28, Chapter 14, EIS M1 to Raymond Terrace). The land is divided into three lots. The DP number for the most considerable portion of land is DP846612, Lot 14. The DP number for the smaller pieces of land is DP 840996 Lots 14 and 15. If NSW Transport does not have a conservation plan for this land, one must be implemented. The northwest corner of this property is adjacent to the Grahamstown Canal Bridge fauna underpass. This underpass connects to the primary koala habitat through Elizabeth Reserve and along Grahamstown Drain. See Koalamap 2021 in Figure 2 in the attachment window. Furthermore, there are two clusters of Eucalyptus Parramattensis subsp. decadens growing on this property in the M1's footprint (Appendix I, Figure 4-5, map 5 of 5 pages 156). There may be more clusters of this threatened koala food species on this property, which will increase its conservation value. The eastern boundary of this property is connected to the Tilligerry State Conservation Area. This Conservation Area extends from Raymond Terrace to Tanilba Bay. Koalas and their preferred food trees inhabit it. The address of the land which is on the market is 6c Elizabeth Avenue, Raymond Terrace, DP 853008, Lot 42. It is 8.44 hectares and zoned as a rural landscape (Commercial Real Estate). Figure 3 in the attachment window shows this property and the adjacent habitat. The northeast corner of the property borders a forest that connects to the south side of the Grahamstown Drain fauna underpass. The boundaries of this property form a triangle. The eastern side of the property joins the Pacific Highway. The north side connects to Elizabeth Reserve. Figure 3 has a white circle around this Reserve. The Muree Golf Course is on the north side of Elizabeth Reserve. Figure 3 has a blue boundary around the golf course. In addition, Boomerang Park and Pioneer Hill Cemetery connect to the west edge of the Golf Course. The above sites contain preferred koala food trees.
The preservation of native vegetation on these two properties will ensure koalas have a viable corridor from the east and west side of the Motorway. Furthermore, this will allow the recolonisation of koalas into Raymond Terrace. David Paull, an ecologist, conducted an environmental assessment of Boomerang Park, in 2016 and confirmed the existence of koala habitat. He also reviewed the easterly connectivity from Boomerang Park through to the Golf Course. He said, ‘…the high number of koala records from the adjacent Muree Golf Course complex provides enough evidence to show that this area provides valuable habitat for Koalas. The existing native vegetation offers valuable habitat and dispersal opportunities for fauna. The Golf Course, in turn, has good connectivity with other larger remnants, including public land to the south (6c Elizabeth Avenue) and east of Raymond Terrace.’ The land to the east Paull referred to includes project land owned by Transport connecting to Tilligerry State Conservation Area. 'Boomerang Park has good connectivity with surrounding habitat offering means of dispersal off the Park through Muree Golf Course. The existence of connecting habitat implies that re-use of the Park by Koalas and other fauna is highly possible at any time’ (Paull, D. 2016). There is a long history of volunteers planting koala food trees along Grahamstown Drain, in Elizabeth Reserve and Boomerang Park. Furthermore, there are plans to grow more koala food trees at the Hunter Water Waste Treatment Works and the Muree Golf Course.
The conservation of these pieces of land can also be used for biobanking of flora species lost in the construction footprint at Heatherbrae. For example, the Biodiversity Assessment Report on page 44 identified several ‘plant community types’ impacted by the project. The PCT 1717 and 1646 are present on these two pieces of land. Hence the land could be used as offsets. The project includes a bridge over Windeyer's Creek which functions as a wildlife underpass. Given the wetland and primary habitat under the bridge, consideration should be given to make the area accessible to koalas. "By removing the risk of mammals getting their paws wet they will use...underpasses (Moore, T, 2016)" By fitting a wooden ledge along the bridge batter (or other structures) koalas will be able to have a dry passage under the bridge" (Environment 2020,p.3). In the case that the banks of the creek leading to the underpass are wet then koalas will need elevated structures such as wildlife furniture to access the fauna crossing. The Department of Environment, Energy and Science give examples of these types of structures (Environment, 2020). The next underpass is the bridge going over Grahamstown Drain. This is the last crossing for this project. According to Koalamap M1 2021 there is primary koala habitat on the east and west sides of Grahamstown Drain. It is appreciated that the plan for the M1 is to continue with this crossing for koalas. Given the decline in the koala population it is critical that every strategy that has the potential to protect koalas from the impact of the project is employed. Fauna fencing to prevent vehicle strikes and maintaining connectivity for koalas to move away from the impacts of the proposed development will be beneficial. Preserving vegetation on the two parcels of land described above will ensure there are corridors to reserves such as Tilligerry State Conservation Area that have ample access to koala habitat in protective environments. Koalas need corridors for their genetic diversity which ensures their resilience and ability to reproduce. Implementation of these measure may contribute to the recovery of the declining koala population in the Port Stephens Area. Thank you for considering the above suggestions.

Too big and expensive. A tunnel under the Hunter River and Hexham Swamp from Brandy Hill to Raymond Terrace would be better and probably less expensive. Need to be appropriate exits for Fuel - Petrol , EV Chargers, and Hydrogen.
Need to allow for an enormous growth in truck and B Double Container traffic if Port of Newcastle constructs its container Terminal @ 2,000,000 containers PA.
Need to not impeded a very big growth of Freight Rail and Passenger Rail networks from Newcastle N/west to Inland Rail at Narrabri Port, and w to Maitland & other regional towns.
Needs to hold Genuine consultations with All affected Communities, and other stakeholders, and the setting up of a Community Consultation Panel

Submission on the proposed Black Hill to Raymond Terrace extension of the M1
from the Newcastle Greens Local Government Reference Group
to Director – Resource Assessments NSW Planning Industry & Environment

Background
The Newcastle Greens Local Government Reference Group believes the proposed extension will have clear benefits for traffic flow and safety by creating a dual carriageway, removing heavy vehicles from local roads and reducing peak time delays currently experienced by north-bound traffic from Newcastle and eastern Lake Macquarie heading north over Hexham Bridge. However, it will, like all major new roads, have the undesired effect of attracting more people to travel by car, increasing traffic on connecting and distributor routes and, in short time, creating new traffic bottlenecks and an overall increases in exhaust pollution.
In general, the choice of route reduces the impact of such a large infrastructure development on the natural and built environment by following existing road alignments and property boundaries, so the footprint largely avoids natural areas and does not intersect settlements. The long bridge carries the road above the Hunter River and adjoining wetlands, reducing the impact on these ecosystems and water flows.
The construction of the M1 extension should eliminate any need to build an extension from the end of the Newcastle Inner-city Bypass at Sandgate, across Ash Island to the Pacific Highway at Tomago for travellers heading north from Newcastle and east Lake Macquarie.
We offer the following comments on the Environmental Impact Statement.
1. Biodiversity impacts are locally significant, as the project is adding to the cumulative impact of urban and industrial development and transport corridors on the north-western edge on Newcastle that has fragmented local ecological communities, cleared native bushland, filled and drained local wetlands, and reduced native animal populations.

The EIS provides a comprehensive inventory of the impact of the project and the “biodiversity credits” required to offset the loss of vegetation, animal species and connectivity. In the Biodiversity Assessment Report, the potential to purchase suitable offset credits is detailed in Appendix 1. We note that almost none of the available offset credits are available contiguous to or in proximity to the project site, with the bulk available in the Upper Hunter and Karuah-Manning regions, and some as far away as the Southern Highlands.
There are opportunities to find suitable 2:1 like-for-like offsets or rehabilitation offsets that add to conservation lands around the Hunter estuary (Hunter Wetlands National Park, Wetlands Centre, Ash Island and Fullerton Cove), the Stockton to Watagans green corridor (including the Tank Paddock, Blue Gum Hills Regional Park, Stockrington Valley), and in the estuarine and bushland areas of Port Stephens and Lake Macquarie LGAs. The constructing authority should actively seek expressions of interest from Maitland, Cessnock, Newcastle, Port Stephens and Lake Macquarie Councils, Hunter and Central Coast Regions National Parks, Hunter Water, the Hunter Wetlands Centre, and other public authorities to identify local sites that may provide suitable offsets.
Given the extent of the offsets required, and the difficulty of finding these, a payment to the Biodiversity Conservation Fund in lieu of offsets should not form part of the project proposal. Biodiversity offsets to compensate for project impacts should be secured in advance of project commencement to ensure that there is no lag between the time of impact and the provision of compensatory measures.
2. Climate change assessment provides a detailed inventory of the Scope 1, 2 & 3 carbon emissions expected from the project, amounting to 243,263 tonnes CO2 equivalent, more than half of it coming from the scope 3 emissions from the production and use of construction materials, particularly steel and cement.

Although not currently a statutory requirement, we urge that, in keeping with the NSW Government’s Net Zero Plan’s greenhouse gas emission targets of 35% reduction from 2005 levels by 2030 and net zero by 2050, the project should not only identify its carbon budget, but should outline options and preferred actions to offset these emissions, to make the project carbon neutral. This would be similar to the identification of biodiversity impacts and offsets in the current EIS process. In future, this should become standard practice for all major projects above a certain cost threshold or above a certain emissions threshold.

3. Flooding and sea level rise assessment show that some parts of the carriageway and connecting ramps may be inundated in a 1:100year ARI flood, and that this will be exacerbated in future by predicted increases in rainfall intensity in the catchment and the effects of sea level rise in the tidal estuary due to climate change. Table 10-13 in the Hydrology and Flooding Assessment shows the carriageway and connecting lanes may be overtopped in the same four locations in nine of the ten climate change scenarios considered.

It is not clear from the assessment if the depth and velocity of the water over the inundated carriageway would cause the closure of the M1, but we would have to assume it has the potential to close or severely limit the operation of the road in at least some of the scenarios that provide a proxy for a future 1:100year ARI flood with changed rainfall and sea levels.

Given that local suburban roads, the Pacific Highway and the New England Highway are already impassable in some locations in a current 1:100year ARI flood, and this will get worse with the effects of climate change and rising sea levels, it seems essential that the main north-south carriageway of the M1 should remain open in a predicted flood up to at least a 1:100year ARI threshold, and preferably to a 1:200year ARI threshold.

The EIS says the additional cost, and the predicted increases in local flooding due to the increased road construction footprint, means the works required to make the carriageway flood-free over the next 50-100 years are not justified at this time. We question this assessment.

Assuming increases in local flood heights would be caused by extending and/or raising embankments that create a barrier to local flood flows, we suggest the use of bridging rather than embankments to raise ramps and the main carriageway could alleviate this problem and assist future flood-proofing. While doing the work now will increase construction costs, it will have to be done sometime and this simply shifts the cost of necessary works to a future generation.

At a minimum, the project should not proceed until it is determined what works may be required in future to flood-proof the road, and what climate change thresholds would be used to trigger additional works. This will give a clearer view of the timing, feasibility and costs of future modifications and indicate to local landholders and planners the footprint required for future construction or re-routing.

4. Alternative routes have been discussed for many years to create a new Pacific Highway crossing over the Hunter River to address traffic issues at the Hexham Bridge. This proposal is the end result of those considerations. However, one route that has been discussed in the past was to a link the northern end of the Newcastle Inner-city Bypass, across the south arm of the Hunter River to Ash Island and to Tomago Road and the Pacific Highway south of Raymond Terrace. This could then be linked to the M1 using the Richmond Vale railway easement across the Hexham Swamp.

As the Richmond Vale route has been specifically rejected by this assessment (rightly so), does this mean NSW Transport now rule out a second new crossing from Sandgate via Ash Island, at least for the time being? This information is of great importance to local urban planners, transport planners, and natural resource managers. Putting an end to this proposal would add to the benefits accruing from the M1 extension project and should be included in the project assessment.

We thank you for the opportunity to put our suggestions to you and look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely
Greg Giles on behalf of the Newcastle Greens Local Government Reference Group

Please see attached submission from RVRT Inc. Thank You.

See attachments