Light Rail Stage 2B isn’t worth the cost, says council. Photo: ACT Government.
The Inner South Canberra Community Council has called for an independent review of the draft Environmental Impact Statement for Light Rail Stage 2B.
In its submission to the draft EIS consultation, the council says the draft EIS author, AECOM, is not an independent consultant, having been awarded a $93 million design contract for the light rail project.
AECOM, the council says, describes its role as “providing the Technical Advisory service to Major Projects Canberra or the engineering design and environmental approvals for Light Rail Stage 2″.
The council says this conflicts with the requirements of the EPBC Act.
“The EIS Scoping document requires ‘that the proponent engage a suitably qualified independent consultant to prepare an EIS, OR the proponent submits, with the draft EIS, an independent review of the draft EIS undertaken by a suitably qualified consultant’,” the submission says.
It says a genuinely independent review of the draft EIS needs to be undertaken.
The council’s submission comes down against the project on financial, environmental, heritage planning and procedural grounds.
It says the requirements of the EPBC Act and the scoping document are again ignored in the draft EIS’s lack of serious analysis of alternatives.
“The draft EIS fails to adequately analyse and compare Light Rail Stage 2B with other options, modes of transport and routes and transport policies that could provide better journey times at lower cost and much less inconvenience,” the council says.
This includes electric buses and transit lanes, which it says are being adopted in other cities and appear well-suited to Canberra’s main roads.
If light rail is built, the council supports the less impactful route proposed by Kingston Barton Residents Group Richard Johnston, in which light rail leaves Commonwealth Avenue at the King Edward Terrace exit, travelling along Langton Terrace into King George Terrace and around Walpole Street to Kings Avenue.
But it argues that the heritage and environmental damage the project will do to the National Triangle and in Yarralumla, where a track station is proposed, will outweigh the claimed benefits, as will the cost.
“The loss of heritage trees, landscapes, and impact on a wildlife corridor are significant,” it says.
“Removing trees along Commonwealth Avenue, the streets of Barton and around Parliament House is a major concern.”
The council says the draft EIS fails to explain how the proposed Mint Interchange will work with the Kent Street light rail, or how Stage 2B will integrate with bus services in south Canberra, Woden, Weston Creek and Tuggeranong.
It says construction impacts have been understated, and the proposed traffic diversions are unrealistic.
The council says the ACT Government has not shown that the Territory can afford Stage 2B, given the high level of the Territory’s debt, escalating interest payments, and recent increases in rates and other charges.
It says any so-called Commonwealth assistance will have no effect on the Territory’s overall finances as it would be deducted by the Grants Commission from GST payments to the ACT.
“The Queensland Government, with much greater resources, has recently abandoned a similar extension to the Gold Coast light rail, on grounds of affordability,” the submission says.
It says the up to $5 billion cost of the project will impact the government’s ability to pay for the ACT’s essential services such as health, education, public housing and community safety.
Even claims about reducing greenhouse gas emissions are questioned, with the council saying the government has not shown how the benefit of any reduced urban expansion will outweigh this.
“Benefits cannot and should not be considered in isolation from consequential disbenefits and costs,” the council says.
