Serious gaps in AECOM EIS for Landfill site, says environmental scientist

This information was prepared by Charlie Pierce, an environmental scientist who works as a Laboratory Manager for Sydney Water. He also has professional experience in the regulation of NSW landfills. It relates to the closure plan for the Alexandria Landfill ( Appendix F )which would become the new St Peters Interchange if the proposal goes ahead.

Here is some context to the information that Pierce has included in his submission to the New M5 EIS.

Alexandria Landfill – a community problem from Dial a Dump to Westconnex 

In December 2014, the Westconnex Delivery Authority forcibly acquired the massive Alexandria Landfill own by Dial a Dump. This is the site on which it plans to build the massive St Peters Interchange. Like all long term landfills, it is a highly polluted site.

The community experienced countless pollution problems with the site during the years that Dial a Dump owned it Eventually, after a Sydney Morning Herald expose of environmental problems with the site, including that it was  used for illegal dumping of asbestos , the NSW Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)  issued Clean Up notice to remove asbestos from what is known as Stockpile 21 in the south west corner of the site. When Dial a Dump failed to comply with this notice, the EPA extended the notice. The asbestos had still not been removed when Westconnex quietly compulsorily acquired the contaminated site. The landfill site closed and the Clean-Up notice lapsed. Continue reading

Advertisements

Beverly Hills resident rejects WestCONnex impacts on South West Sydney

By Kathy Calman, spokesperson for the Beverly Hills/Kingsgrove WestCONnex Action Group

For those of you who are not familiar with our suburbs, the communities of Beverly Hills, Kingsgrove, Bexley North, Earlwood and Arncliffe lived through years of construction for the first M5 circa 2001, (Legacy M5).

The legacy M5 resulted in a ‘Berlin Wall’ effect that separated our community into two. The North and South sides.  It also had a devastating impact on residents in regards to pollution. Turrella and Earlwood, with an unfiltered exhaust stack, and Bexley North and Arncliffe with tunnel portals (openings).

Homes, the trees and parks taken. Years of construction, and then, to thank us for our endurance, we were handed cheap, visually divisive noise walls and poor urban design.   The urban design and landscaping was of such a poor standard that Allambee Crescent Nth Beverly Hills actually features in the RMS Landscape and Design Principles as an excellent example of what NOT to do.

Allambee Crescent Nth Beverly Hills circa 2015.

Screenshot from the RMS Urban Landscape Design Principles
Screenshot from the RMS Urban Landscape Design Principles
The noise wall is visually divisive and bears no contextual relationship to the setting in this residential area on the Northern side of the M5 East
The noise wall is visually divisive and bears no contextual relationship to the setting in this residential area on the Northern side of the M5 East

It is a credit to Council and a few residents of these communities that they took the repair of our environment into our own hands.  We had no choice because the RMS would not.

“Landscaping” by the Community & Canterbury Council – maturing growth circa 2015.
“Landscaping” by the Community & Canterbury Council – maturing growth circa 2015

Untitled

 

The M5 turned out to be a noisy congested old fashioned solution to traffic congestion. But the NSW government has learned nothing. Again last year we found ourselves faced with new projects.  Firstly there was the expansion of the King Georges Road Interchange and now a duplicate of the old failed M5 – call the New M5

Continue reading

Vol-1C Chapter-29 Environmental-risk-analysis

Previous chapter: Vol 1C Chapter 28 Sustainability

Vol 1C Chapter 29 Environmental risk analysis

hi-res pdf: New M5 EIS Vol 1C.pdf

Low-res pdf: New M5 EIS Vol 1C Chapter 29 Environmental risk analysis.pdf

Section Pages
29 Environmental risk analysis 29-1
29.1 Environmental risk analysis process 29-1
29.2 Preliminary environmental assessment 29-2
29.3 Assessment of the key issues identified in the SEARs 29-2
29.4 Risk analysis summary 29-3

Next chapter: Vol 1C Chapter 30 Summary of environmental management measures

Vol-1C Chapter-30 Summary-of-environmental-management-measures

Previous chapter: Vol 1C Chapter 29 Environmental risk analysis

Vol 1C Chapter 30 Summary of environmental management measures

hi-res pdf: New M5 EIS Vol 1C.pdf

Low-res pdf: New M5 EIS Vol 1C Chapter 30 Summary of environmental management measures.pdf

Section Pages
30 Summary of environmental management measures 30-1

Next chapter: Vol 1C Chapter 31 Project justification and conclusion