To whom it may concern,

 

I write regarding the current proposal to reserve a corridor for the ‘Lower Hunter Freight Corridor’.

 

I can see the benefits of the proposal in general. A rail freight bypass of Newcastle helping to relieve congestion on the suburban line will help with noise, freight productivity and passenger service speeds to Central Coast and Sydney. This seems a no-brainer, however my concerns lie in the details of the current proposal and can be summarised into the 5 key points below:

1.      Disadvantaged members of western Lake Macquarie are being asked to ‘pay’ for the benefits to our more affluent inner Newcastle brothers and sisters

2.      Quantitative noise assessment has not been presented

3.      Technical/Engineering flaws of the proposed route

4.      Poor land use planning – particularly with regards to the proposal taking the potential ‘faster rail’ corridor which would provide direct benefits to those impacted by the line.

5.      Genuine options study has not been undertaken

 

I will now provide some further background to my concerns.

1.      Disadvantaged members of western Lake Macquarie are being asked to ‘pay’ for the benefits to our more affluent inner Newcastle brothers and sisters

The current proposal would see a new dedicated freight rail line constructed through the residential suburbs of Barnsley, Killingworth, West Wallsend, Holmesville, and Cameron Park (the Suburbs). It is essential to note that this is an area currently free from rail noise, and a massive residential growth centre for Newcastle and Lake Macquarie.

The proposal would remove rail freight from the current train line between Fassifern and Newcastle. This would have clear benefits to those currently living along the train line. I have no issue with a proposal that provides these benefits. However, I do have an issue with the people of western Lake Macquarie being asked to ‘pay’ for the benefits of those in more affluent suburbs in Newcastle.

I have no doubt that the proposal will negatively effect house prices, amenity, health, and community in the Suburbs. This proposal is unjust.

Further, those impacted by the proposal are statistically less likely to understand the proposal (particularly with the 150+ page environmental assessment being the only document that discusses the options), let alone understand the impacts and how to speak up. Those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have less means to enter into the consultation and are less connected with those who may be able to influence the outcome.

I appreciate the current COVID-19 restrictions make face-to-face consultation with community groups difficult or impossible. However, the gravity and potential impact of this proposal should involve direct community consultation, even if this means the consultation is delayed until it is possible to do so. The construction is noted as being 10-20 years away, so why not wait to consult with the public properly once it is safe to do so, rather than hide behind enormous environmental assessments and MS Teams ‘consultation’ which are not a suitable replacement for genuine face-to-face conversation.

I applaud Mr Clayton Barr MP for mailing potentially impacted residents to advise of the proposal and advocating for an extension to the consultation period as a result of COVID-19 lockdown impacts.

 

2.      Quantitative noise assessment has not been presented

From my review of the environmental assessment, a quantitative noise assessment has not been presented.

A quantitative noise assessment that identifies properties currently with no freight train noise that would be subject to noise in the proposal is an essential piece of the planning. Not even an estimate of distance from the rail line that would result in residents being able to hear the trains is presented. This is essential for residents to truly understand the impacts of this proposal and for true consultation to occur.

The report relies upon bushland as a ‘buffer’ for noise. It is well presented in relevant technical literature that vegetation provides little to no noise buffer. At source treatments including noise walls are the only real way to mitigate noise once the alignment is fixed.

Noise walls adjacent to ALL residential suburbs should be mandated and priced in the budget at this stage to avoid embarrassing budget blowouts later. The proposed noise walls should be presented clearly in a figure for all to understand.

It is disgraceful that the noise impact summary (section 7.5.2) concludes that “The strategic review of noise and vibration found that protection of the Lower Hunter Freight Corridor would not impact on existing noise and vibration levels.” This is a complete misrepresentation, hiding behind the fact that the current proposal is to reserve a corridor, not build a train line.

A proper quantitative noise assessment must be undertaken for this project. This cannot be simply deferred to later stages once the corridor is already locked in place!

 

3.      Technical/Engineering flaws of the proposed route

Several significant Engineering challenges are presented with the current proposal. Three are:

-        Tunnel in the vicinity of Fassifern. The proposed tunnel is through land well known to have significant mining history with substantial risk of mine subsidence. The Corridor team need to understand that this is not Sydney, not are they proposing a typical tunnel through Sydney Sandstone. The presence of mine voids is likely to be impossible to fully identify in planning and poses an unacceptable risk to the proposed tunnelling in this area.

-        The proposed crossing of the corridor of the M1 north of Cameron Park is at a very severe skew angle. The skew angle is such that a bridge of the M1 would appear to be in the order of 100m. At this length, a central pier would be required to be constructed (with significant interruption to the M1 Motorway) and would still preclude standard precast forms of bridge girder given the span length of 50m. A perpendicular crossing of the M1 (or as close as possible) would allow a shorter span (closer to 50m total) and more simple bridge forms at considerable cost savings.

-        The route passes through coastal wetlands and threatened lower hunter spotted gum to the southwest of Holmesville/Barnsley. This could all be avoided if a proper route options study had been conducted in the southern half of the corridor.

It is crucial that technical issues such as those presented above are properly considered at these early stages to avoid budget blowouts. Too often we see these types of technical issues simply pushed down the road to ‘detailed design’ or subsequent stages of planning. This is guaranteed to result in an increased cost to the taxpayer if there is no intervention.

 

4.      Poor land use planning – particularly with regards to the proposal taking the potential ‘faster rail’ corridor which would provide direct benefits to those impacted by the line.

The current proposal involves a mixture of sections running along the west and east of the M1 Motorway. The proposal must seek to run along the west of the M1 for as long as possible (this is not currently achieved). This alone would result in a significant improvement in amenity, noise impact and land use outcomes for all suburbs along the route.

Perhaps of greater importance is the reservation of a long-term corridor for ‘faster rail’ passenger service along NSW east coast. Past route studies by the Federal Government included a station for Newcastle in the vicinity of Cameron Park. While a ‘faster rail’ project is not approved or even funded, it is the government’s responsibility to consider long term planning.

A Newcastle ‘faster rail’ station must be on the eastern side of the M1 Motorway, with a normal speed rail stub into Newcastle. I would presume this would run from Holmesville towards Cardiff, joining the existing line. A ‘faster rail’ would indeed have noise impacts, but the key difference is that those impacted by the noise are also the ones who benefit from the improved connectivity and potential house price increases. This is a more just situation that is presented by the Lower Hunter Freight Corridor.

To preserve the future ‘faster rail’ corridor and station options, the Lower Hunter Freight Corridor must stick the west of the M1 Motorway for as much of the route as possible at all costs.

 

5.      Genuine options study has not been undertaken

Finally, but perhaps of most concern is that NO single option has been considered that would avoid impact to the Suburbs. This is not a true options study. ALL options presented are identical in the southern half of the route. The study area has been artificially constrained presumably to maximise the use of existing owned government land.

If the problem statement is – how do we reduce congestion on the Newcastle line, leading to the proposal of a freight rail bypass of Newcastle, then why is the study area so narrow.

Upon review of the ‘long list’ of options found buried in the appendices of the environmental assessment it is even more apparent that a genuine attempt at options study has not been undertaken. For example, one option considered (no doubt in order to make the current proposals impacts look minor) was to put a freight line through the middle of Barnsley and newly developing suburb of Cameron Park. Clearly this was never a real option, and was only put forward as a way to make the current proposal look better than it is. Have a real go!

Just ONE option that could have been considered in a genuine options study is:

-        A line that diverts from the current line south of Awaba (at the closest point to the M1 corridor in this area). The line would head west of the M1 corridor as soon as possible.

-        The western side of the M1 corridor is far less populated and is the most appropriate alignment for a noisy freight line in the future. This is clearly sensible land use planning.

-        My alternate option would have numerous additional benefits over the current proposal:

o   Removal of freight noise from additional suburbs including the growing areas of west Lake Macquarie around Toronto (Fassifern, Awaba etc). Noting recent residential developments including Billy’s Lookout.

o   Preservation of the eastern side of M1 corridor for the future ‘faster rail’ alignment. A future ‘faster rail’ line would provide direct benefits to the Suburbs whereas a freight line does not. Past ‘faster rail’ route assessments by the Federal Government considered a Newcastle satellite station in the vicinity of Cameron Park (presumably south-west of Holmesville). The current proposal severs this future route.

-        A proper options assessment MUST be undertaken including multiple route options in the southern half of the route.

 

Kind Regards

The people of Killingworth, Barnsley, Holmesville, West Wallsend and Cameron Park.