These extracts are provided as a glimpse of what the experts are saying about the impact of the EWL project, especially on the local area. Please refer to the full report as provided by the links for an understanding of the context of each statement.
A full list of all expert reports is provided here.
There is a common theme in all the expert reports – that the analysis should not “be limited to the Project Boundary defined by the LMA, as it is fails to consider the considerable impacts on the municipality of Moonee Valley.”
What we learn:
The CIS predicts:
Project Design & Assessment
Plan Melbourne is reported to “enhance Victoria’s freight competitiveness, providing a more efficient road transport link for major industrial areas and intermodal terminals across the city. The implications are that if this project were to proceed, it may remove traffic from the East West Link”
The EWL proposes “an alternative to the M1 for cross-city capacity.” However Victoria’s Freight Strategy (2013) “emphasis is placed on the North East Link providing a fully functioning ring road. It states that this orbital route would be heavily utilised to transfer freight between ‘freight gateway’ locations such as Hastings, the Western Interstate Freight Terminal (located in the west of Melbourne), and other freight locations. It also states that the major freight and logistics precincts would be progressively migrated to the periphery of Melbourne, including the relocation of the rail freight hub from the East West Link (Eastern Section, Part A) Dynon Road Area, of which $5 million of Commonwealth and State funding has been allocated to commence business case work developing options for the future staged relocation of rail activity”
Flemington Community Garden
The elevated viaducts would cause significant overshadowing of the plots, and traffic travelling along the road infrastructure has the potential to compromise the air and water quality in the vicinity of the garden. In addition, the noise and vibration impacts, both during construction and operation, would detract from the intrinsic quality and value of the community garden. This could lead to possible reductions in membership which may in turn affect the long term viability of the garden. This may also discourage participation amongst some gardeners with the result that they could lose the health and social benefits directly associated with the garden.