Janet’s Westconnex Journey – “we’re fighting to save the community we love”

Sydney Park Photo
Janet, Michael and their son, Fred in Sydney Park – 14,000 square metres of which will be taken by WestCONnex. Photo by Martin Brady

( Ed: Janet Dandy-Ward is a founder and key member of the WestCONnex Action Group WAG). She lives in Roberts Street St Peters, a suburb that will be devastated by WestCONnex . She is a friendly and familiar figure in the streets of St Peters, Newtown and in Sydney Park, squeezing the organisation of weekend campaigning stalls  into her busy life.  In this edited version of her submission to the New M5 EIS she describes why she is fighting WestCONnex and her observations of the planning process and impacts the project will have on her community and the rest of Sydney. You can help the WAG campaign by using their site to send your own submission to NSW Planning or go direct to NSW Planning site.  These will be open until midnight Jan. 29.)

My husband and I emigrated to Australia in 2011 (leaving all our family back in the UK) and we moved into this house in Roberts Street deciding that it could be a base whilst we think about what area we might want to move to. We fell in love with the street, our neighbours, our community, the community pre-school and our surrounding green spaces such as Sydney Park, Tilman and Simpson Park – all will be affected by WestCONnex. Incidentally, the neighbour I mention above is like a surrogate grandparent to our son. It is likely that she and her 80 year old husband will move from the street if this project goes ahead.

We have decided that St Peters is where we want to live and have already invested so much in the community – this is something that is worth fighting for; for my family, for our neighbours who are potentially losing their homes due to forced acquisitions, for those older and vulnerable residents who are now feeling uncertain about their future in this and other suburbs. Sydney deserves better.

As a social worker, I have a deep sense of social justice. I believe that this project will not meet its key objectives including reducing traffic congestion. This is a fundamental flaw. The social and environmental impacts briefly described in the EIS are unacceptable and far outweigh any benefits of the project. There are so many aspects of the traffic modelling that as a mum and a full time trainer in a large children’s charity, I have not had time to address in my submission. I have read the research about traffic inducement and I firmly believe that if you build more roads then more traffic will come, I saw this back in the UK with the development of the M25 London Orbital Motorway. Continue reading


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

Vol-2A App-F Landfill-Closure-Management-Plan

Chapter: Vol 1A Chapter 06 Construction work

Previous appendix: Vol 2A App D Properties affected by acquisition

Appendix Vol 2A App F Landfill Closure Management Plan

Hi-res pdf: New M5 EIS Vol 2A App F Landfill Closure Management Plan.pdf

Low-res pdfs:

Section Pages
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Objective 2
1.3 Purpose and scope 2
1.4 Relevant guidelines 3
1.5 Consultation 3
2.0 Site description 5
3.0 Site history 7
4.0 Site conditions and surrounding environment 11
5.0 Existing site features, monitoring and management 13
5.1 Landfill cap 13
5.2 Leachate management system 13
5.2.1 Existing leachate management system 13
5.2.2 Leachate characterisation 13
5.3 Leachate treatment plant 15
5.4 Surface water and stormwater management system 15
5.5 Groundwater management 16
5.5.1 Groundwater management system and monitoring network 16
5.5.2 Groundwater quality 17
5.6 Landfill gas and air monitoring 18
5.6.1 Landfill gas management system 18
5.6.2 Landfill gas characterisation 19
5.7 Existing monitoring and management requirements 23
6.0 Proposed final landform and land use 25
6.1 Final landform 25
6.2 Final land use 26
7.0 Landfill closure and rehabilitation 27
7.1 Closure and stabilisation of the landfill 27
8.0 Site closure – Key components 29
8.1 Final landfill cap design 29
8.1.1 Growing media establishment following installation of cap 30
8.1.2 Revegetation 30
8.2 Landfill gas management 31
8.3 Landfill Fire Management 31
8.4 Leachate drainage layer 32
8.5 Leachate management 33
8.5.1 Leachate treatment plant 33
8.5.2 Stormwater and leachate pump station 33
8.6 Surface water drainage management 34
8.7 Asbestos management 34
9.0 Proposed management and monitoring 35
9.1 Landfill closure phase monitoring and management requirements 35
9.2 Post closure phase monitoring and management requirements 47
10.0 Operational responsibilities and reporting requirements 49
10.1 Operational responsibilities 49
10.2 Reporting frequency 50
11.0 Closure phase communications and reporting 51
11.1 Communications protocols 51
11.2 Environmental audit schedule 51
11.3 Annual document review 51
12.0 Certified Statement of Completion 53
13.0 References 55
Appendix A Figures and Design Drawings A
Appendix B SEARs B
Appendix C Existing EPLs and TWA C
Appendix D Technical Memos and Diagrams D
Appendix E Asbestos Management Plan E
Appendix F Proposed Groundwater and Leachate Monitoring Plan F
Appendix G Proposed Leachate Extraction Management Plan G
Appendix H Proposed Landfill Gas Extraction Management Plan H