M5 Corridor Expansion Adds to the Motorway Mess in 2010

With the passage of 24 months since a Labor government minister said the public would be provided with a discussion paper about the M4 East, no further official information has been forthcoming. Now, however, the RTA has brought out another proposal for an innercity motorway which puts in place the launching points for both the M4 East AND the F6/M6 motorways (see more detail of the Evans & Peck proposals being considered for the state government's 'Transport Blueprint').

Another motorway?!?
The proposal to 'expand' the M5 corridor is aimed at taking advantage of the federal governments interest in improving the movement of freight in the M5 corridor.

MTAG is concerned about this proposal for a number of reasons, each of which should play a significant role in changing the direction that the Department of Transport and Infrastructure takes on this project.

The M5 Corridor Expansion is premised upon projections, estimates and objectives outlined in planning documents that are in the process of being revised. Our understanding of the State Plan 2009 is that it is likely to present quite a different picture to that of the existing State Plan. This is most likely to be seen in the objectives for transport planning in Sydney, particularly with respect to reducing green house gas emissions. For this reason, and in light of current discussions regarding an emissions trading system or carbon tax, MTAG would like to suggest that options that will reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by a significant margin be prioritised.

It is also a concern that while this study appears to have been prepared for release over the Christmas 2009 period, the approach to evaluating the various options outlined seems to pre-date the amalgamation of the NSW state transport agencies. There is little or no detail on public transport options in the study documents that the public is supposed to provide comment upon.

With respect to the specific terms of the report MTAG advises that it has concerns about the following matters.

The study prepared for the RTA claims that the options prepared will address both state and federal goals for a range of important indicators. Far from harmonising national or state goals outlined in the study, the options which receive the most attention are more likely to have a negative impact on both sets of the indicators, particularly those concerned with urban amenity, air pollution, and climate change mitigation.

Justifications for road expansion, based on potential developments of either employment centres or residential areas, appear to be quite speculative. In either case, the investment of funds in additional roads space would be wholly inadequate to the tasks outlined. Therefore it is difficult to see how such developments can be used to justify the costs of the RTA's preferred option.

Most importantly, this project states clearly that the main reason for pursuing the road expansion option over other means of reducing congestion, specifically improvements to public transport options in this corridor and improvements to rail freight capacity, is that money will be required.

Clearly, money will be required by the RTA preferred option, and it is our view that these funds, should they become available, would be better deployed in reducing the prevalence of single occupant vehicles (SOV) through the provision of more efficient modes of transport.

Write a submission that requests a thorough exploration of travel demand management through expanded public transport in this corridor.
Comments can be submitted by:

* Email: m5expansion@rta.nsw.gov.au This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
* Post: RTA, M5 corridor expansion, PO Box 609, Pyrmont NSW 2009.
* Website: online feedback form.