GORE HILL FREEWAY - M2 MOTORWAY TUNNEL
Mrs CHIKAROVSKI (Lane Cove) [4.50]: For some time constituents in Lane Cove have been concerned about what will happen when the M2 opens. Honourable members may be aware that the M2 is at one end of my electorate and that the Gore Hill Freeway is towards the other end. In between is Epping Road, referred to as the missing link by my constituents. When the M2 opens it is perfectly obvious that the traffic flow along Epping Road will be greatly increased; a matter of concern to people living along that section of the road. This is not a new problem; in the 1980s the Roads and Traffic Authority recognised that that section of road needed to be upgraded, and prepared initial proposals involving grade separation.
Once it was determined that the M2 would continue to completion and an environmental impact statement was completed, the RTA commissioned a study to examine road development options for Epping Road and Longueville Road. Again there was some suggestion about grade separation, but when those options were put to the electorate it became perfectly clear that they were unacceptable. A decision was taken to investigate the possibility of a tunnel, or of varying the length, and at the end of October 1993 it became clear that a tunnel option would be pursued. I have received letters from consultants involved in this proposal, including Sinclair Knight and Partners Pty Limited, Jackson Teece Chesterman Willis Consultants Pty Limited and Connell Wagner, which indicate that the development of the link between the M2 and the Gore Hill Freeway would be by way of tunnel. The RTA had advised Sinclair Knight that it was prepared to arrange additional work. Its letter dated 20 April 1994 stated:
. . . the Authority is prepared to arrange additional work to:
•Refine the Tunnel Option to reduce urban impacts and costs;
•Develop urban design initiatives for the area adjacent to Epping Road through Lane Cove, which will provide a future vision for the corridor;
•Investigate whether a feasible finance plan for the tunnel can be developed.
Those same guidelines were carried over into the Jackson Teece Chesterman Willis planning meetings, which continued throughout 1994. A letter from Jackson Teece Chesterman Willis stated:
The purpose of this meeting will be to review the proposed plan for the conduct of the study and to present the team's preliminary views on the urban design and financing options for a tunnel.
That was the brief that Sinclair Knight and Jackson Teece Chesterman Willis had; it is the brief that Connell Wagner has, and it is conducting the last study into what should happen between the M2 and the Gore Hill Freeway. Connell Wagner has been examining the brief for some time and has recommended that a tunnel be constructed for this section of road. I understand that a report was first presented to the Government in January this year, according to an application I lodged with the freedom of information co-ordinator, Mr Phillip Youngman. The report was presented to the RTA in January 1996. My FOI request has not been responded to because that report has gone back and forth between the RTA and the consultants - they are up to the ninth version of it. The report is not finalised because the consultants refuse to walk away from their recommendation for a tunnel. The consultants have refused to bow to the wishes of the RTA, which again recommended grade separation.
Whilst we recognise that the costs of the tunnel will be high, it is the only acceptable alternative for my electorate. A new group, the M2 Lane Cove Tunnel Action Group, consisting of interested residents and businesses in the area, does not believe that the recommendation in the report is sufficient. The group would like to put forward another tunnel proposal. Until the Government is prepared to release its report, in whatever form - and I understand it will have "Version 9" on the cover, because the consultants want people to understand the pressure they have been experiencing - a further proposal cannot be put into the public arena and properly discussed. I ask the Minister for Roads to release the report. My constituents need to see the report to decide whether they accept it, or reject it and work towards an alternative solution. [Time expired.]
Page 5051