Moorebank Intermodal Precinct West - Stage 2

Please find below my official submission. I object to these proposals.

Health
The NSW 2021 plan states that `The best health policy government can deliver is one that keeps people out of hospital. By focussing on illness prevention, we can reduce the burden of chronic disease on the health system and keep our community active and healthy.'
An Intermodal freight terminal at Moorebank will create health problems for the community, particularly respiratory disease.
Particulate Matter (PM 2.5) levels in the area are already above the recommended national average. An Intermodal freight terminal, introducing thousands of trucks and over 40 freight trains a day, will compound this problem by drowning the Moorebank area and surrounding suburbs with diesel fumes and the PM 2.5 particles associated with this pollution.
An intermodal freight terminal at Moorebank will increase the burden on the health system by placing members of the community at unnecessary risk of respiratory illness.

Travel times
`The NSW Government is committed to delivering an efficient and effective transport system that reduces the time it takes to travel around Sydney and across NSW.' The NSW target it is to `Improve the efficiency of the road network during peak times on Sydney's Road corridors.' They are committed to delivering road infrastructure to `relieve congestion, improve safety, and enhance and expand capacity on road corridors'.
The site of the proposed Moorebank Intermodal is along one of the busiest road corridors in the state. This corridor narrow and carries as many cars per day at the Sydney Harbour Bridge. It does not make sense to place an intermodal freight terminal which will introduce approximately 10,000 trucks per day into this area. This will create a bottle neck effect on the M5 and M7 and produce traffic gridlock for the South West and West. Flow on effects will be felt in the wider Sydney area.
An Intermodal freight terminal at Moorebank will increase the time it takes to travel around Sydney.

Road safety
The NSW Government wants to `make our roads the safest in the country'. They plan to do this by identifying dangerous or confusing sections of the road and by cutting congestion, introducing safe, simpler speed zones to save lives.
The introduction of an Intermodal freight terminal near the Moorebank Avenue entrance to the M5 will create a dangerous intersection. Trucks attempting to get up to speed on the short onramp and then weave into traffic at a speed of 100km an hour will make this section of the road extremely unsafe.

Renovate Infrastructure
The NSW 2021 plan states that `renovating our infrastructure is central to achieving economic growth. The right infrastructure, in the right place, not only boasts productivity and competitiveness, but makes a difference to people's quality of life.'
The proposed Moorebank intermodal freight terminal is an example of infrastructure planned for the wrong location. The freight terminal is located in the middle of a residential area, geographically constrained by river crossings of not only access roads, but also the freight rail line.
The majority of freight entering the terminal is destined for the West and North West, so will need to be transferred for a considerable road journey before arriving at its final destination. This will place further pressure on an already congested road network.
The proposed Moorebank intermodal will cost billions in required road upgrades and will not necessarily reduce supply chain costs due to the increased distance freight will need to travel to reach its destination. The proposed Moorebank intermodal will not assist the state in achieving economic growth; it will be an economic burden. It will not increase productivity due to duplication in handling requirements and increase in supply chain costs brought on by poor location choice.
There are better options for infrastructure placement that will assist the state in achieving economic growth, boasting productivity and competitiveness and making a difference to people's quality of life.

Freight rail movement
The NSW Government wants to `Enhance rail freight movement by undertaking detailed modelling to determine future operating capacity of NSW ports including analysis of landside infrastructure and options to increase the use of rail to service ports'.
Modelling, in particular traffic modelling, undertaken for the proposed Moorebank intermodal freight terminal was based on outdated traffic modelling calculations and is therefore inaccurate. The proposed terminal at Moorebank should not be considered on outdated and incorrect modelling data.
The majority of freight entering the proposed Moorebank Intermodal freight terminal is destined for the West and North West, it make sense to investigate direct rail options for inland freight terminals closer to this final destination. Providing a more direct route for freight to its final destination will enhance freight movement in Sydney and increase the use of rail to service ports.




Environment
The NSW want to protect rivers, wetlands and costal environments. The goal by 2021 is to `improve the environmental health of wetlands and catchments through actively managing water for the environment'.
The introduction of an intermodal freight terminal on the banks of the Georges River, at Moorebank, is set to be an environmental disaster for the area. Many wetland species reside in this area and will be threatened by pollution created from a heavy industrial precinct. Species such as the Platypus, found in this area, will be under threat from pollutants such as diesel and debris from the intermodal terminal that will flow into the river in times of flood.

A priority action for the NSW Government, as stated in NSW 2021 is to `work with catchment management authorities and local community groups to regenerate degraded natural bushland, including riverbanks, and degraded waterways through a $10 million fund.'
It seems the introduction of an intermodal freight terminal on the banks of the Georges River, at Moorebank, is at odds with this particular government priority. Access to the river will be restricted due to the busy intermodal freight terminal.
The good work of bodies such as the Georges River Environmental Alliance will be restricted and undermined by the introduction of an intermodal freight terminal at Moorebank.

The NSW government recognise that `clean air is important for the health of the NSW community. Providing information on local air quality empowers local communities to engage in informed discussion on air quality.'
The air quality in Sydney's South West is already above the national recommended limit of 8mg. An Intermodal freight terminal, introducing thousands of trucks and over 40 freight trains a day, will compound this problem by drowning the Moorebank area and surrounding suburbs with diesel fumes and the PM 2.5 particles associated with this pollution.
There has been no willingness from either of the proponents or the government to engage with the community in discussion around air quality impacts of the proposed intermodal terminal at Moorebank. Air quality has been recognised as being already bad in the area. Words such as `mitigation' are brought up when the proponents talk about the impacts of the freight terminal in this area. Mitigation is not good enough for our community.
Air quality in the Liverpool area basin will worsen with the introduction of an intermodal freight terminal and will create health problems for the community, particularly respiratory disease.




Flooding
The NSW government priorities include `designing urban areas to better funnel water away from critical infrastructure and homes' to protect areas from flooding.
The proposed Moorebank Intermodal freight terminal is located in the middle of a flood zone. This is completely adverse to the government's priorities and poses pollution risk to the local area, including the fragile ecosystem of the George's River.

Biosecurity threats
According to the State Plan NSW2021, `pests and disease outbreaks threaten the productivity and competitiveness of our industries and impact on communities. Strong biosecurity measures will ensure they have minimal impact on the NSW economy, environment and community, and protect against and help limit the risk.
Placing a freight container terminal next to natural bushland and on the banks of the George's River is a direct threat to habitats in this area. The threat of introduced species and disease brought in from interstate and international shipments will be high.
The threat of biosecurity risks to local residents will also be elevated with customs activities occurring at the Moorebank site.

Restore accountability to Government
The NSW Government states that `Citizens can expect the public service, as the protector of public interest and defender of public value, to put the public interest front and centre in public service and functions..... Building trust demands honesty, transparency and clear accountability across the civil domain.'
The process undertaken for the proposed SIMTA and Moorebank intermodal freight terminals has not been transparent. Confusing planning processes, coupled with two different developments on the one site has led to public confusion. It has all been smoke and mirrors.
The people of the Moorebank (and surrounding suburbs) area feel that their interests have not been protected, that they have not received a fair go, and there has been no transparency and accountability from government in relation to this process. The people of the Moorebank area have lost trust in the government to do the right thing by them.
The Moorebank proposal has been proven to be in the wrong location with dire economical consequences for the rest of the city, through reduced productivity as a result of a congested road network, and increase costs to the tax payer through required road upgrades. There is now a chance to stop this project before it becomes a financial burden on the state.

Build liveable centres
The NSW Government target to introduce `planning policy to encourage job growth in centres close to where people live and to provide access by public transport' does not align with an intermodal freight terminal at Moorebank.
Overseas case studies prove that intermodal freight terminals placed in residential areas, like Moorebank, actually lead to negative job growth in an area. This is because intermodal freight terminals themselves do not require a large workforce, particularly in relation to their size. Intermodal freight terminals built in areas where they are surrounded by similar and complementary industry surrounding them do promote positive job growth.
This indicates that the intermodal freight terminal is actually planned for the wrong area. For this facility to promote positive job growth it should instead be placed at Eastern Creek or Badgerys Creek.
The Moorebank site with its access to public transport is more suited to developments such as a business technology park, new housing estate, or educational facility.

Increase public transport usage
The site planned for the proposed Moorebank intermodal can assist the government in meeting its targets to `increase the share of commuter trips made by public transport' if the land is utilised for other, more suitable developments such as a business technology park, new housing estate, or educational facility.

Increase walking and cycling
The site planned for the proposed Moorebank intermodal can assist the government in meeting its targets to `increase walking and cycling' if the land is utilised for other, more suitable developments such as a business technology park, new housing estate, or educational facility.
More suitable developments can include walking and cycling tracks that will promote active transport along the banks of the beautiful George's River.

Community involvement in decision making
A priority action of the NSW Government is to `increase local decision making and participation in decision making so that people can influence decisions that affect them. The NSW Government will increase opportunities for people to participate in localised decision making and through local government encourage them to have a real say on local planning decisions.
The local residents of Moorebank and Liverpool have been left out of local decision making processes surrounding the proposed intermodal freight terminal. The process of assessing two separate applications through the department of Planning, rather than one master plan for the precinct, has made the process arduous and confusing for residents. As a result, many residents have felt that they do not have a say in this decision making process and have felt too intimidated to try and have their voices heard.
Yours Sincerely,
Dominic Scutella

I want you to know that we all oppose the above project


Moorebank Avenue sites, Government and SIMTA are meters away from residential homes both in Casula and Wattle Grove. Please Google to see that the site is just meters away from St Andrews Boulevard, Congressional Drive and Anzac Parade.
How does the government plan to protect these people? Especially on the Casula side which is a HILL SIDE estate facing the proposed intermodal. The government site also lies on the banks of the Georges River to which to date numerous studies and groups have been involved with the process of cleaning up and protecting the river. Placing an intermodal on the river will only contaminate it and bring the number of group's efforts to no avail. To date the river has undergone a period of regeneration. Further, a joint council and community based committee is being established for the Georges River, as we speak. Not to mention the heritage aspect of the area.
A proper environmental and impact study has been not been undertaken. It is a farce that Groups that have a conflict of interest are a part of the consultation and environmental process. To date the consultation process by SIMTA has been APPALLING. The fact that they do not reply to emails, target specific individual houses with leaflets known to be opposed to the project and NOT distribute leaflets to entire streets making them aware of what is occurring is unacceptable
To the point regarding this submission itself, persons like me only heard about it via the grapevine and not through media or leaflet distribution. The fact that this submission has been released through the Easter period whilst residents are away or busy with Easter again says that even with a new government the transparency and deceit of former governments may just carry through into this present government and again will not be looked upon favourably by media outlets that are following the intermodal process.
The fact that the proposed sites will operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week is totally unacceptable. The resident's health will be put at risk due to diesel fumes, noise and extremely bright light 24/7. The noise that will be transmitted by container lifting equipment and train shunting, also lights will result in the residents getting no sleep night.
This would be bad enough if the operation worked eight hours per day 5 days per week let alone 24/7. There have been no studies into the health impacts of locating an intermodal so close to residential area. In a known pollution basin such as Liverpool where pollution is not dispersed easily. There is a huge backlash in the United States regarding intermodals located in the vicinity of residents and as a result lawsuits undertaken and WON due to increased health impacts such as asthma, heart disease etc. Placing an intermodal of a large scale mid suburbia in a statistically known pollution area (Liverpool) and then further ADDING to the pollution is only going to put a strain of the Health system and inevitable law suits as seen with the Asbestos example.
There are many people now in the Liverpool area who have educated themselves into the health impacts of a proposed intermodal with the help of professors and Congress people in the United States. I would not take the notion of lawsuits lightly.
The concept of Intermodal Terminals are that they are located a minimum of 40 Kilometres from each other, which isn't the case in respect of the proposed sites with Port Botany being 28km and Enfield 12km. It is suggested that the financial viability of terminals closer than 40 km's is questionable.
Rail freighting containers to Moorebank and then delivering 80% of them to western and north western suburbs of Sydney will increase the delivery time frame considerably, impacting cost.
Despite the widening of the M5. Additional 2000 + trucks coming into this area daily will put the M5 into a daily gridlock. So once a car park always a car park.
Again, there is deceit stating that the government is widening the M5 for commuters when in actual fact it is widening it for additional trucks. It is unacceptable in the words of Tony Abbott move trucks from one area into another which is what this proposal is intending to do and typically, to a lower social economic area because they are perceived to be none the wiser.
Moorebank was selected as it was the cheapest and quickest solution to a problem. I don't believe that any investigation and analysis into the suitability of the proposed sites proximity to residential areas has ever been carried out.

In the UK where land is limited, freight terminals are sited 100km's from cities. With a country like Australia which has a massive expanse of land, we want to build terminals less that 1 km from homes. This must surely suggest that these proposals are RIDICULOUS. Intermodals should be planned in line with the Greens Policy on the outskirts in industrial areas, feting into the cities.
There is ample land on the outskirts of Campbelltown, Badgerys Creek etc. Well away from suburbia. ARTC is already putting a freight line in Campbelltown and the South West Rail line is in the planning process. All it requires is a small extension of the Southern Sydney freight line.
Furthermore by placing intermodals on the outskirts well away from people it will further develop areas such as Campbelltown for people will be inclined to move out there whereas putting it so close to the CBD in Liverpool, people from metro Sydney just drive adding to the congestion on our roads.
It is wiser and more economically viable to place housing along the river, being so close to Sydney CBD where the majority of the population work, on top being on a river. The area should be developed like Homebush (which was a contaminated site) and be a proper regional city and the epicentre of South West Sydney, especially considering its location.
We urge the government and the planning department to look at these proposals from a long term point of view and not as a quick fix or cheap solution. There are alternative sites, but it will cost $ in infrastructure cost which would be more beneficial in the long term. Professors, Congressmen in the USA have stated that Australia is a young progressive country and they would like to see it as an example to the rest of the world in better planning.
Placing intermodals in mid suburbia will just prove that we are a backward nation and have not the intelligence to be forward thinking. As they stated they do not want to see Australia make the same mistake they did in Commerce. We have a country to learn from their mistakes not jump into their mistakes. Better planning for NSW.

Please treat this email as a formal submission to report my opposition & comments of the planning of number Intermodals within the Sydney Basin.

Intermodals within 40 Km of each other are financially unviable. Enfield is only 12 Km from the Port and Moorebank will only be 28 Km from the Port.

The Moorebank Avenue sites "Government Intermodal " plus SIMTA Intermodal plus Warehouse Zone will no doubt overflow its capacity in a few years, taking into consideration the population growth which we all know about and with the south west being one of the areas where the growth is expected to increase at a higher rate. Then a new location will need to be looked at (patching) and the story will continue.

We urge the government and the planning department to have real long term planning, instead of quick wins and patching, it is not the cheap option either as the re location will cost the government half a billion dollars (tax payers money).

I do not think any analysis or investigation on the suitability of the location from its proximity to residential areas was done & if it will be done.
The location is within very close proximity to houses, how anyone would expect our lives to be with all the air pollution that would be generated, the noise and the light 24/7. Not discussing the rail impact, our streets are already very congested and as it stands now it is almost impossible to go on the local roads during peak hours let it be with 2000 trucks more. The M5 is already over full capacity during peak hours and it takes us now double the normal time if we travel on it during peak hours, let it be with 2000 trucks more, even if it has been widened.
The M5 and surrounding roads and intersections at Moorebank will not be able to cope with the extra 3 million trucks per year movements coming and going from the freight precinct, this too will impact the cost of doing business in Sydney via the Moorebank Intermodals.


The project will have a huge impact on our lives, health and wellbeing. It's our health and kids health we are talking about. Noise, Light, Vibration, Diesel Fumes 24/7; and all what's being considered by the project offices and owners are mitigation strategies, how can one mitigate these impacts? End result our health will be damaged, our life will be damaged, and our quiet residential suburbs will be turned into industrial zones. You cannot mitigate deadly impacts; you need to eliminate root causes.

In the UK with very limited land, the nearest intermodal is 100K south of the city, and here in Australia with all the land we have, its less than 1K away from our homes. So having our terminals built meters away from residential suburbs MUSTBE WRONG. With our huge land, we definitely can look at selecting the appropriate location away from residential areas, even if it will cost more to establish a supporting network to it (rail and roads).

I know every project emerges of good proposals and I know the key factors are always time and money, however with infrastructure projects, quick wins and patching, doesn't provide solutions, but more nuisance and issues.
In General, Freight can be delivered direct from Port Botany to final destination within the Sydney Basin far cheaper and quicker than the proposed detour via the Moorebank Intermodals.
The Freight Infrastructure Charge will push up prices immediately when introduced by the government.
Time in transit determines cost. Freighting containers to Moorebank and then 80% onto Western and North Western Sydney will increase the delivery time frame considerably, impacting costs.

If real planning is done by our governments and not planning based only on quick wins, such a huge infrastructure projects will NEVER be built in a very populated city like Liverpool and only meters away from homes.

Adam Scutella

I wish to object to the proposed Intermodals on the following grounds :-
1 TRAFFIC CONGESTION from the huge volume of soil fill and container trucks will make local roads including M5 a nightmare to negotiate.
2. AIR POLLUTION from dust and diesel fumes will cause health problems for local residents.
3. DEGRADATION AND POLLUTION TO GEORGES RIVER which is a valuable amenity and recreation area for locals.
4. DESTRUCTION NATURAL BUSHLAND containing many threatened and rare species and 43 hollow-bearing trees which are desperately needed by birds and other creatures - these are in such short supply that parrots have been trying to nest in traffic lights - how sad is that? This bush land area by the river should be kept as a nature reserve where people -many of whom will be living in high rise apartments being constructed nearby- can come to enjoy the wildlife trees and flora.
I believe the intermodals should be located close to Badgerys Creek Airport as this is the logical site for transport access since roads and infrastructure will be already there.

I object to stage two of this development I live behind the proposed precinct my family lives here and my extended family lives here this a peaceful part of the world.
I drive down the m5 to Campbelltown everyday to work the trucks already on the road block it from Moorebank avenue to Campbelltown road we crawl here on a motor way that has a stated speed of 100 and 110. A journey that should take me 20 minutes can take me double to triple that.

we have a flourishing wildlife I this area of the proposal multiple birds, possums and humans. There are 10 schools in the area, two nursing homes, we do not need sleep deprivation shown to be dangerous to mental health leading to suicide in some case.
We do not need pollution which leads to high incidence of cancer, asthma and autoimmune disease. We chose to build our lives here we can't just up and move away. Why should we bullied out of our own lives!
We have a fantastic community that will be dessimated by this massive intrusion, many have sold and moved away.
We need to preserve this area not destroy it by placing a massive precinct that will congest an already congested area and destroy a peaceful community of flora,fauna and human habitat.
There are not many areas like this one left.
The proposal would be better suited off the m7 where there is much land still available away from communities, flora and fauna habitats.
To me it just does not make sense.
Please re think this for the hard working people who have enough to just invest in their family home and community.

As a local resident I am very concerned about the detrimental effects a intermodal with have in the Liverpool area.

The proposed site is located in close proximity to residential housing and schools. This would seem to pose noise and air pollution problems.

I am concerned at the detrimental effects the development will have on the Georges river and the surrounding wildlife and fauna. The operation and development of the intermodal will have a negative effect on the local environment.

Finally I am also concerned about the increased traffic congestion in the local area. The roads surrounding the site are already at capacity and I am concerned that the extra trucks at the area with bring traffic to a stand still. I am also concerned with having so many trucks operating in a residential area.

regarding the report on Noise and vibration levels . I have read the 97-odd page report prepared by Wilkinson Murray in support of the SIMTA Stage 2 proposal for the Moorebank Intermodal development.
The report reads well and is obviously prepared in a professional manner. The science looks great and to the uninitiated it looks like SIMTA have no cause for concern regarding their proposals.

a) I question in very strong terms, the independence and veracity of the report . The main results point to a fairly moderate +/-2 Db affect to residents in and around the suburbs due to be ruined by this development.
b) the proponents of this scheme have presumably hired these "experts" to support their position .They have utilised CadnaA software to produce Noise level predictions which eminently suit their cause.
c) I consider that nothing was left to chance. The producers of the report used the software to generate the response they were asked to achieve . They are experienced in this sort of thing and knew precisely what to input to achieve the desired output at the behest of the people who engaged them.
d) The +/-2Db result means that this gives the project manager carte blanch to build what they want with little or no mitigation practices required. We are expected to believe the increase in noise levels will be "barely discernable" from the existing noise levels .
e) The inputs seem to have been based on "guesstimates" of existing noise levels . Anticipated levels in the construction and operational stages are guesstimated - there are little or NO independent controls for the activities anticipated or needed.
f) these estimations carry over into the traffic volumes used in their modelling.
g) Railway operational noise have been downplayed unrealistically. the reality is that no matter what practices are utilised there can be NO elimination of offensive wheel squeal because of the radii to be used on the rails. To claim that the difference in noise levels would be indiscernable from existing noise from the MSL and SSFL is fanciful in the extreme. one has to bear in mind that the operations are touted to be operating on a nearly 24/7 basis. Table 8-2 (p42) clearly indicates that all three main suburbs will be subjected to noise intrusions well above acceptable limits . Those people who live within close proximity of course will suffer even more discomfort. The report downplays the effects by relying on NSW guidelines where there are vague opinions that the stated levels "Are not likely " to disturb local's well being. Notice of course there is NO mention of any authority being able to monitor and enforce ANY proposed standards.
h) Most galling is the seemingly contrived conclusion that should this development go ahead, very little or no noise mitigation policies will be needed.
i) The report talks about the projects "Concept plan approval" like its a "Done Deal" . NO MENTION of the restrictions and caveats imposed should the project go ahead. This is more than just wishful thinking on behalf of the proponents. The restrictions are real and should not be ignored .
j) In this submission, Anzac Road has become a major part of the operations, yet no noise mitigation practices have been recommended ..on a 24 hour operation in the middle of a residential district. I believe credibility is an issue here .The report seriously downplays the intrusions and presents "facts" in a disingenuous manner.
k) I question the placement and monitoring of the locations L1/L2/L3 - The locations should have been picked independently so as to avoid skewed results .
l) Bearing in mind the 24 hour operations, little regard has been given to the noise generated by reversing alarms , horns and Pneumatic braking by the trucks using the facility. vague references to "Best Practices" are repeatedly made with out elucidation of what that exactly means. use of alrms and horns are to be "Discouraged" which is hardly an affirmation of resolute firm practices to ensure the amenities of the adjoining suburbs are not disturbed.
m) Finally , and perhaps most insultingly, mitigation measures are claimed to be superfluous because of supposedly existing noise levels. This 24 hour operation in a massive industrial area is to be built with scant regard to the surrounding suburbs because it is claimed that existing noise levels are already an imposition -leading to the conclusion that the extra levels of such a massive enterprise will not cause any further noticeable detriment where detriment already exists!!!

I am against everything about this Developement. It is a riculously criminal development to have near schools and residential areas. Let alone the damage to the environment and the Georges River. If this were a private development the principles would all be jailed. How is the government getting away with this?????

1: Many mitigation measures are required for this project to become viable, however there is not mention of any agency being appointed or established to control, supervise and enforce ALL the mitigation measures required thus making the mitigation measures in the document unenforceable.
As a concerned member of the community I deem it only right that such an INDENPEDENT agency be appointed or established before ANY works begin!
2: For the project to have only ONE main entry point for All trucks is a disaster waiting to happen, Cambridge Ave needs to be upgraded and extended to Heathcote Road for the ability to disperse heavy traffic in the instances where there are major incidents on the M5/Moorebank Ave interchange of which I expect there to be many and frequent because of the high speed weave situations between light and heavy vehicles.
3: The holding yard for approximately 60 heavy vehicles seems woefully inadequate as this number barely equates to ONE of operations. When a major incident occurs, the one hour holding yard will be a terrible joke!

Someone needs to really take a holistic view on whether this proposal complements the local area given the dramatic change in housing and demographic that's occurred in the last 5 years.

Step away from beauracratic process for a moment and whether this proposal meets planning codes and regulations and apply a common sense filter.

Traffic and congestion, air pollution, access to amenities, inadequate infrastructure just to name a few.

I wish to object to the proposed stage 2 development on the following grounds:

1. The denuding a site this large of trees and vegetation is environmental vandalism at its worst. This will result in loss of habitat for many local species of animals and the destruction of local fauna.
2. The roads in the area cannot cope with the thousands of extra truck and van movements which this intermodal will create.
There is already gridlock and with all the extra traffic it will be at a standstill affecting our daily commute and lifestyle. The emissions of diesel from these trucks will put even more sludge in our houses affecting our health.
3. The devastation of our river which should be used for recreation will be polluted from runoff and should a spillage occur.
4. Property valuations will fall as people are driven from their homes.
The Intermodal is in the wrong place. It should be at Badgerys Creek near the new airport.
I feel this company is pushing the boundaries and the more that is granted the more they will want with complete disregard to any consequences arising .

Please listen to the people.

I tried to access the M5 via the Moorebank Rd ramp that leads onto the M5 this week at 4.45 pm but had to join a queue of cars that took approx. 7 minutes to join the M5 traffic. The gridlock that will envelope this area once the semis arrive will create enormous community backlash.it hasn't happened yet as most people too busy managing their their personal lives. As has consistently been demonstrated with the Intermodal project, A government and it's agencies that have gone all out to satisfy the demands of this consortium at the expense of ordinary people, loses the public's trust. The numerous instances of deception utilised to get this project through means we can no longer rely on the government/,t's agencies as they have chosen to prioritise big business interests over the community's interests in every instance in relation to this project.

This proposal is seriously flawed. No consideration has been given to the numerous schools in the surrounding area and the impact the increased diesel emissions will have on their lives. In addition what assurance do we have that Anzac Road will not be used as a shortcut by numerous trucks etc. This road passes through a suburban area and the residents of the houses do not need to be subjected to the increased traffic and noise. Finally anyone who regularly travels along the M%/Hume Highway intersection knows that is already congested with traffic. The rods will not be able to cope with the increased traffic. Please reconsider and back away from this potential environmental disaster.

I object to this proposal.

Land clearing will devastate the local flora and fauna, including the large population of Koalas in the area.
Land clearing will also have a detrimental effect on the local river.
Pollution from this facility will impact the local community. There are at least a dozen schools and aged care facilities in the local area that will suffer if this project is allowed to continue.
The local infrastructure will not cope with an influx of traffic caused by this proposal.
As it stands Anzac Road already needs to be upgraded and sound barriers installed, no upgrades to this road have been planned.

This project is in the wrong location and freight plans show that capacity on the network can be met through other terminals.
This project is a waste of money and will put a drain on the public purse if allowed to continue.

The Moorebank Intermodal should be stopped immediately and relocated to a more suitable area.
Heavy industry should not be placed next to residential areas.

The people of Glenfield have been excluded from receiving project updates and should have definitely been included in the catchment given their proximity to the project site. This is a massive oversight and proof that this project has been poorly planned and managed.

I have significant concerns about the adverse impact the proposed intermodal would create for sorrounding residential areas. Specifically I believe that the intermodal would result in significantly higher levels of heavy road traffic in the Moorebank area affecting local commuters, potential impact to train availability given the use of the rail network by the proposed intermodal. I am also concerned about adverse impacts to the local environment and local residents, including my young children from increased emissions, particularly from increased heavy trucks in the area. The proposal is not appropriate for his area.

Please plan properly and do not put this in a place where 1000s of families live, where it will impact their lifestyle and health.

Think and plan properly. There are hundreds of more appropriate places for this to be located.
Do not ruin families health and lives.

it will add more traffic in the area. Environmentally , more cars mean more pollution.

I work in Moorebank and the traffic is already horrible, why would you place a thing like this in a area thats already struggling?
Also, can you give thought to the families whose health and lives sill be on the line for this?
PLAN PROPERLY.

Please think about the families health and lives and do not let this go through.