WestConnex - M4 East Upgrade

The folly of ending the M4 East tunnel at Wattle Street is extraordinary. The traffic in the morning and evening peaks is already at a standstill on the City West Link and in the morning is often backed up from Anzac Bridge to Wattle Street. Saturday's and even Sunday's are almost as bad. This means that until the tunnel is extended to The Crescent as is proposed the roads around Haberfield and Five Dock will continue to be used as "rat runs" worsening life in these suburbs. The short sightedness is mind boggling!

1/ Traffic is just being moved from one bottle neck to the next.
2/ A feeder lane up Waratah Street is irresponsible to childrens safety. Feeding traffic from a major road past a primary school to a dangerous roundabout at the interstection of Boomerang St and Dalhousie St, is not a productive solution to dealing with traffic. I don't reside in Haberfield and already know of 2 small children who have been hit at that roundabout in the last 8 mths.
3/ I can't see any information about a food bridge over Dobroyd Parade. Local Primary School, Light Rail Stop, Timbrell Park, Livi's Place, BMX bike track, Dog off leash area and foot path leading to the very busy bay walk are major factors for attracting padestrians, many who are young, to the lights at the intersection of Waratah Street and Dobroyd Parade. This is a VERY dangerous intersection. Pedestrians walk on green arrow and are often missed by drivers. (9 misses for our family since Feb 2015, 4 were cars running a red light at speed.)
4/ I understand drivers will miss 22 sets of lights, but you are just moving traffic closer to another 6 sets of lights, which already have existing traffic at a stand still during peak times. Why make it easier to bring cars TO THE CENTER OF SYDNEY. TAKE THEM AWAY, MAKE THEM GO AROUND or end at car park facilities and train stations/trams.

I do not think these submissions will make any difference in the NSW Government's thoughts but people will still make them to have them registered.
Quality of lives of many people whose houses will physically be so badly affected by this tunnel will diminish. Our lives in my house have already been as badly affected as this was the only house we could afford in our lives after the age of 55.
Value of the houses will be written off by this tunnel because the tunnel will almost go through our buildings. Nobody in my street is happy about the tunnel. Many people have lost their sleeps over this, but who cares.
Unless the tunnel goes through some other places where nobody's house is affected, it is the worst initiative we will have to experience and we are made by the NSW Government to experience in our lives. Who will compensate the losses we will experience and how? But, who cares?
We very strongly object to it.

To Whom it May Concern,

The WestConnex concept should be cancelled. Numerous research confirms additional roads simply lead to increased congestion.

The funds should be used for increase public transport options.

The public release of an EIS - after construction plans have been released, after contracts have been awarded - no matter what it says, is really an insult to Sydney constituents and road users.

There can be absolutely no benefit to the communities who will be subjected to living alongside three enormous spewing exhaust stacks - each with a dispersal radius of over two kilometres.

And what about the destruction of amenity to beautiful Sydney park by the future St Peters Interchange?

How can air quality improve along Parramatta Rd when traffic will be able to move faster and therefore provide an opportunity for more car users to take advantage of the projected decrease in travel time?

There can be no benefit to road users having to pay crippling tolls just so they can negotiate a maze of overhead ramps and get stuck in traffic congestion - increased congestion on the Government's estimation until completion of this huge monstrosity around 2023!

I also have to query the reality of this Government actually changing any of its plans following this submission procedure: all its plans appear to be set in concrete and this EIS process is yet another display of the NSW Government's lip-service attitude towards the people of NSW.

Regarding cycle access to and from Homebush Bay Drive.

As far as I'm aware, cyclists currently don't use Homebush Bay Drive. I've never seen one on that road.

Using the M4 shoulder. Again I haven't seen any cyclist using the M4 shoulder around Homebush.

Everyone goes through the Olympic precinct to get around this area, separated from the traffic.

From experience of using the M2 & M7, the shoulders are a bad idea, full of glass and right next to speeding trucks and cars.
If you the maximum number of people to use the cycleway, it needs to be a completely separated cyclepath, well away from the M4 & Homebush drive.

Most cyclists would not use it.

Dear Planning Unit, I live in Newington where I will be affected with the M4 widening. I am a car driver, ferry commuter and cyclist. I sincerely hope that when widening the M4 East that you please add a dedicated separated bike path similar to the M7. At various times, I have calculated my commute into the city by car at 20kmh! On the bike riding the M7 I average 17kmh. The M4 is highly congested and a bike path that is as safe as the M7 will encourage women like me with families to ride into the city in a safe, secure and healthy way. I look forward to the cycleway and I believe will relieve the traffic congestion. If you could link the M4 cycle way to the M7 cycleway that will be great as well. I do believe that one day I will be able to ride from Newington to the CBD in a safe and secure way in no longer than what it takes me to drive. Please make this the reality soon. Please extend the cycleway so that it just does not end at Pomeroy St but that it can join the City West Link bike path safely. The widening is a great opportunity to build infrastructure not just for drivers but for cyclists or even pedestrians - of which I am all three at various stages. Thank you for considering this submission.

I am opposing the design of Cintra Park tunnel site. The location of water treatment plant, water quality basin, distribution substation and fresh air supply facility are too close to the residence properties of Taylor Street Five Dock, they are right behind their backyards. There are major visual and environmental impact to their daily livability. And there will be impact to their properties market value. Also it is unclear if there are any health impact by the electromagnetic field from the substation and air pollution from air supply facility, are there any prevention of exhaust of toxic air? These water treatment plant, water quality basin, distribution substation and fresh air supply facility can be relocate to either the new car parking area on north of Concord Oval (where it's plan for use as parking area during construction of Westconnex), or on the west side of the Cintra Park tunnel site, which is next to the St Lukes Park Canel, where it is far away from the residential area of Taylor Street.

In the world, no other developed countries are building new motorways or as many tunnels as NSW? Why? If NSW government had looked around the world they would see that building new roads etc so you can travel in a car quicker fill up and get full quickly. So they new roads you are building will be full in several years! What is the answer? Public Transport. Its hard to think NSW is part of the world, as if you looked outside NSW you would see its not worth building these roads!
You plan to put new residents onto Parramatta road? Where are the schools, hospitals etc going to come from for the new
people? Have you spoke to the local councils you plan to removed?
You plan to build an poison outlet in Rozelle Yard. Have to spoken to the local council (lmc) about the plans you have.
You are totally out of step with the rest of the developed plans. Withdraw them now!

I am representing my entire family, who reside at 3 Alexandra Avenue, Croydon, NSW 2132.

We are strongly against the extension of the M4 tunnel for the following reasons

-devaluation of our land and property (i have called up the project team, and they mentioned that the tunnel will be 35m below ground, underneath our property. This will impact the infrastructure of our house, not to mention the neighbourhoods'; and this devalues the price that was paid for the property, when we acquired the property, we paid market value for the property. We would not have chosen to move to; or have paid as much money, for this property, if we knew that the M4 was going to be extended to underneath our property)
- Noise - with the construction of the M4 in our area, this will have created more traffics in the neighbourhood and within the tunnel, not to mention air quality decline, as well as constant loud and noisy construction site during the period. Our neighbourhood which was once quiet will be immensely impacted. Again, we are not comfortable at all that the M4 is going to be extended to underneath our porperty.

-Air pollution - again, this is quite an obvious remark, as redirecting traffic to our neighbourhood and nearby, will mean that the air quality will have been massively reduced. Air pollution will be more concentrated.

Overall, we expect compensation - if this is to go ahead, i will expect full market value to be paid to us for our property as per processes set out in the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compnsation) Act 1991, as well as being eligible for payments in
- lump sum compensation for leaving the neighbourhood
-legal costs including conveyancing
-valuation fees
-relocation expenses (including stamp duty costs in connection with the purchases of another property of equal or more value)
-mortgage re-establishment costs and other payments


Let me reiterate, that we are not willing to move and we love the nice and quiet neighbourhood. We are strongly against the M4 project, as this will impact the quality of our life, amongst those in the neighbourhood.

Should the project go ahead, despite all the protests by the government, then i would expect compensation as per listed above - because i will be unwilling to live in such a neighbourhood should the M4 tunnel be extended to under my household, and in the surrounding areas.

Hi, I would like to understand the impact on traffic from Haberfield to the city on Parramatta Rd. Parramatta Rd from Haberfield to the city is already a bottle neck. I can only imagine that traffic entering Parramatta Rd, from Ashfield will worsen this already congested road.
Regards
Jenny

Homebush Bay drive is a major bottleneck because of the traffic using it as a link to the M4 (especially at the at-grade traffic signals for right turn movements).
The new West Connex will increase the use of Homebush Bay Drive and therefore increase the bottleneck.

The State Government should carefully consider the connection between the West Connex (and M4) with Homebush Bay Drive so that merge ramps provide access in all directions without having to wait at at-grade traffic signals that delay north south traffic flow (keep them separate and unobstructed). There is an abundance of land and space to properly design such a connection at an early stage.

As a separate matter consideration should be given to improve access along Homebush Drive at Ryde Bridge as well. The West Connex would be great except it will generate increase bottlenecks in nearby locations for drivers trying to get to it. It will showcase these locations even more.

I regularly drive between Leichhardt and Concord, especially on weekends when the traffic on both Parramatta Rd and Queens Rd through Concord and Five Dock is extremely heavy. Any proposal to divert through traffic off these streets underground must be considered a positive move, regardless of the impact on a limited number of local residents.

This submission relates to the question of access into and out of the Western section of Martin Street, Haberfield (the current "dead end"). I have already raised objections to the intent of the current diagrams that clearly show that the needs of those who reside in this section of street have been grossly overlooked. It is totally unacceptable that under the current plan those exiting onto the City West Link (CWL) and wanting to make a right-hand turn will be forced to go to Norton Street, Leichhardt to do so OR they will have to do a left-turn at Timbrell Drive, go around the roundabout at the intersection of Henley Marine Drive & Arthur Street in Five Dock, and then come back and cross over the CWL into Mortley Avenue, Haberfield. As to what provisions have been made for those coming along the CWL from the City, I questionned whether they would be able to turn right into Ramsay Street and then right again into the CWL so as to allow a left-hand turn into Martin Street (West). As of today's date, I have received no advice or explanation.

Currently, Martin Street extends into a section of Dobroyd Parade and that Parade is closed where it intersects with Ramsay Street. This closure was made when the CWL construction took place and clearly is designed to prevent vehicles doing a "rat run" from Ramsay Street to the CWL and vice-versa. A quite sensible and justifiable solution to the unacceptable traffic plan detailed above would be to close-off this section of Martin Street to the CWL and to open the now-closed junction of Ramsay Street and Dobroyd Parade. It goes without saying that if this solution was followed traffic lights would be essential there to alleviate the inherent dangers to vehicle movements especially during peak periods. This is a highly important traffic management issue and needs resolution sooner than later.

I am writing in regard to the new design for the West Connex Tunnel between Homebush and Haberfield.

i am concerned as to the impact on my and surrounding properties in the construction. Whilst the tunnel is 35 metres below the houses in this area are mostly federation vintage and have the associated old footings, mortar etc.

What studies and guarantees do the residents have in regards to damage from tunnelling and vibrations our homes may have.

i am fully aware that NSW needs to progress but am concerned at what cost. One would presume the original option was suitable to more residents rather than increase concerns over even more people and their homes and lives being uprooted.

What Guarantee do we have that any damage to our homes will be rectified and in a timely manner.

Thank you

The new concept design shows the tunnel travelling under proximately near my residence in the northern section of Burwood and Croydon. It is very much different from the original design which shows the tunnel travelling directly under Parramatta Road. I am concerned that the new design will have the structural impact on my property. This fear of the impact produces bad effect on my health and my family welfare. I would like to request you to take into consideration of the harmful consequence that the new design concept has on approximately 500 households in the northern section of Burwood and Croydon including mine.

Your care in this matter is much appreciated.

Regards


Vinh Ho

I object the new plan and request that the tunnel remain under Parramatta Road as previously intended.

I object the proposed new route for the M4 East Tunnel extension. Please reconsider and remain the tunnel under Parramatta Road.

1. The original design released in 2013 shows the M4 east tunnel travelling under parramatta Road. The proposed new route is vastly different. It will go under 500 homes in Northern Burwood and Croydon. Most of the houses are with old time foundations. There will be huge structural impact on the houses, including two heritage conservation areas. i request that the tunnel remain under Parramatta road as previously intended.
2. I support the proposal of Burwood north rezoning for high density residential development. Burwood road north already be rezoned. But Neich Pde east side remains low zone, just by the little Riley lane. Now the high rise on other side of Riley lane over cast the skyline, shadow and dust always on top of the houses along this side of Riley lane. Should rezone the area by zone/block, not by house or just cut the zone/block without reasonable space gap. There is different zones on either sides of the little Riley Lane. It is really ridiculous! So please let this side of Riley lane rezone as well. I do support the State Government proposal to rezone Burwood North which shows Neich Pde on this side of Riley lane will be rezoned. Thanks!

I am objecting to the current proposed WestConnex project on the grounds that the EASTERN ventilation facility is too close to areas with high concentration of old aged residents and very young children (there are hundreds of children attending different childcare facilities within 500m of the proposed Eastern ventilation facility, e.g., Infants Home, which my children are attending).

I do not see any hard evidence that the outlet could support the ventilation of the tunnels while preventing toxic particles from impacting the short-term and LONG term health of the vulnerable population in its close proximity. Furthermore, it appears the ventilation facility does not even have any filtration systems.

I strongly suggest the project to reconsider having the ventilation facility to be place in an area not too close to high concentration of vulnerable population.