WestConnex - M4 East Upgrade

The Westconnex M4 East has no real benefit to Sydney but comes with a huge cost both financially and environmentally.

Expensive tolls, increased pollution, unfiltered emissions, heritage homes and businesses destroyed, communities disrupted and more traffic in the city, not to mention the huge capital outlay. And what for?

Advocates say it will :
* "Save 40 mins on a trip from Parramatta to the airport".... What city in the world encourages cars to drive to an airport? Why pay huge amounts for parking and tolls to fly?

* "Create more jobs constructing it" ....Increasing public transport will create even more long term jobs.

* "Remove through traffic and create better neighbourhoods" .... Westconnex will actually divide communities with concrete and promote car use.

* "Bypass 22 traffic lights and create a better road network" .... It will simply shift the bottle neck closer to the city. The City West Link is already congested and has another 5 sets of traffic lights to the already congested Anzac bridge.

Let's look at simpler, sensible solutions to the traffic problems : More public transport covering ALL of Sydney, more free parking at major rail stations, bike paths and space for walking. Let's discourage car use in the city and invest this money in better public transport.

I object on the grounds that the proposed air vents are close to highly populated area as well as The Infant's Home Child Care and other public facilities and schools. My concern is the quality of air and how it will affect the youngest, the oldest and most vulnerable in my local area. I am angry at the recent articles (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/inner-west/how-the-154b-westconnex-highway-will-affect-sydney-residents/story-fngr8h4f-1227520574395) confirming there will be NO filtration systems installed for this high traffic area. The idea that this conforms to "best practice" is laughable. I am concerned as to why in addition to the M4 East ventilation in the future also the M4-M5 link air ventilation will be diverted to this area. In one part of the original pamphlet about this WestConnex project its explained the air quality will be minimally affected but in the next section its suggested to divert all air vents to one area as to minimise environmental impact to other areas of the city, which is contradictory. also I am doubtful that all this additional pollution dumped in one area is said to propose "negligible" impact on air quality and on the health of the local residents. The other area of concern is that there appears to be minimal planning for public transport in this project, which seems to be very short sighted.

First of all, I submit that allowing this road to exceed emissions and noise limits is not on. There's no need for vehicles to be dangerously dirty these days, nor need they be noisy. This project can certainly comply with limits, so it must.

Simply passing the health and economic costs to those impacts, for the convenience of profit is unacceptable. This government report gives guidance as to the economic impact of auto pollution: https://bitre.gov.au/publications/2005/files/wp_063.pdf

Limiting the road's use to clean and quiet vehicles would meet the objective of limiting this particular road's impact on health.


Secondly A project of this scale has the responsibility to provide high quality, connected cycling links for the full length of, and across the project corridor. The cycling provisioning (end of EIS Volume 1A (Part 1) appears to be contained to:
1."...the permanent re-routing of part of the existing eastbound cycleway on the northern side of the M4 from west of Homebush Bay Drive to near Pomeroy Street,


2.a new westbound cycleway on-ramp connection from Queen Street at North Strathfield to the existing M4"

Which is very very far short of meeting the safe, protected cycleway requirement. The construction of this project must not proceed until the proper cycling facilities have been put in place.

I object to building every part of the WestConnex M$ East as it will cause more traffic in the inner west where I live. I would have liked to see the business case and environmental impact statement before any decision was made which has not been the case. There has been no transparency in this process. More funds need to be allocated to public transport not encouraging more cars on our roads to pollute our city.

I'm opposed to the construction of the M4 East Tunnel and do not believe that spending $15.4 billion to achieve a 6 minute travel time saving is justified and alternative options should be evaluated.

The Government has ignored the community by signing contracts to build this road before releasing this EIS, the full business case, or obtaining planning approval.

I want the following address from the EIS
* Filter the exhaust stacks and relocate them away from schools and childcare centres
* Build a noise wall for properties in Ashfield next to Parramatta Road interchange during/after construction
* Restrict tunnelling and truck movements to standard construction hours - No 24/7 truck movements
* Review underlying traffic modelling, specifically in reference to; increase use of private/commercial diesel vehicles, traffic flow predications to take into account approval of Badgery Creek Airport/Rail
* Direct comparison with alternative public transport options such as light-rail

This project will not solve Sydney's traffic problems and NSW tax payers money is better spent investing in Public Transport. Please consider my concerns and address them in your response to the community's submissions to the EIS.

Regards

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

I make the following submission to the Environmental Impact Statement exhibition for the Westconnex M4 East Tunnel Project (SSI 6307):

I am opposed to the construction of the M4 East Tunnel and do not believe that spending $15.4 billion to achieve a 6 minute travel time saving is justified. I am concerned that the proposed link road to the City West Link will be insufficient to accommodate the greater volume of traffic and will consequently simply move the congestion to Haberfield, where it will in any case bank back into the tunnel.

The Government has ignored the community by signing contracts to build this road before releasing the EIS, the full business case or obtaining planning approval.
The EIS shows that this unjustified project will irreversibly destroy the heritage values of Haberfield, Australia's oldest garden suburb
.
I would like to see the following addressed from the EIS:
* filter the smoke stacks and relocate away from schools and childcare centres. One sound justification for a tunnel is to reduce the surface pollution along Parramatta Rd. A tunnel presents a solution to actually remove this pollution via a filter. Failing to filter the smoke stacks would be irresponsible and pose an unacceptable health risk. That this is planned to be located near Haberfield Public School and a number of child care centres is an outrageous endangering of our children.
* build a noise wall for properties in Ashfield next to Parramatta Rd interchange during and after construction
* stop rat-running through Haberfield and Ashfield by closing Chandos St at Parramatta Rd after construction
* offer voluntary acquisition and WDA- funded dilapidation reports for those properties near construction sites in Northcote, Wolseley, Wattle, Walker, Ramsay, Chandos and Lotus Streets
* restrict tunneling and truck movements to standard construction hours - no 24/7 truck movements
* return acquired properties not required after construction to Ashfield Council for community use and public open space.

This project will not solve Sydney's traffic problems and NSW taxpayers' money is better spent investing in public transport, especially along Parramatta Rd and on new routes connecting the inner west, an area which currently relies on a hub-and-spokes model requiring a trip to the city to travel, for example, from Ashfield to Marrickville. Please consider my concerns and address them in your response to the community's submissions to the EIS.

Yours faithfully

Catherine Pavey

I am writing to oppose the lack of aesthetics and sound barrier walls relating to the Concord Road Interchange.
I am a resident in North Strathfield and I feel the suggested sound walls and aesthetic treatments are not sufficient.
I propose:

1. An aesthetic wall be installed at the back of the houses in the northern end of Carrington Street, North Strathfield. At this stage it appears the temporary construction wall will removed at the end of construction and not replaced. We want this wall to serve two purposes; to be visually interesting and provide a barrier to the noise from the freeway.

2. Substantial trees and hedges to be planted against this wall to provide further sound and visual barriers.
3. Aesthetically pleasing sound barrier walls along the motorway that runs in front of the remaining houses in Sydney Street.
4. Substantial planting along the southern side of Sydney Street (between exit of M4 and Concord Road) - to provide a visual barrier from the motorway.

5. Substantial planting along the sound walls in the loop out of the Concord Road interchange.

6. Aesthetically pleasing and substantial sound barriers above the entrance and the exit of the tunnels and the Concord Road interchange. This will help reduce the noise of trucks braking and cars accelerating in and out of the tunnel.

7. Assurances that the green spaces around the Concord Road interchange will not become areas to dump rubbish. This is already evident in a small green space at the Sydney Street exit of the M4 motorway (end of Queen Lane).

8. The green space at the end of Sydney Street of the M4 be considered along with the new green space created as a result of the Concord Road interchange.

9. As a concession to the upheaval that residents in North Strathfield are facing as a result of the WestConnex - we require substantial planting along the railway line along Queen Street between Parramatta Road and Wellbank Street. The visual barrier of hedges and trees was removed as a result of the Northern Sydney Freight Rail corridor and were never replaced.

We should NOT be encouraging more people to be driving into the CBD by providing bigger roads and tunnels that channel them into bottlenecks as they get closer to the city. It is obvious to everyone that we need a better public transport system that will keep cars off the road which will in turn reduce pollution and traffic chaos. I DO NOT want unfiltered pollution pumping stacks anywhere near my suburb or surrounding suburbs that will endanger us and our children. Spend your 15.4 Billion dollars on better options such as the Light Rail System.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I was told by a neighbor about this new plan. I'm shocked and frustrated. In the media release, the map was shown that the tunnel would be underneath Parramatta road. There are lack of transparency and details regarding the plan. I have not been informed and still don't know there will be a tunnel going under my house.

We went to the booth at Westfield to find out more about the new plan. The map is very unclear and were told there would be possible the tunnel going under my house. We were told there are development along Parramatta road with cafes and apartments. The new plan would be in straighter line and would reduce costs.

However, these will cost to the property owners and tenants. My concerns are:

- Safety issues - any possibility that the tunnel collapses ? It happened the Lane Cove tunnel
- The impact on property value
- Vibrations and possible effect

From, Inner west resident

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to object to the lack of aesthetic sound barriers and walls at the Concord Road Interchange, North Strathfield.

At present, the homes in Sydney Street and Carrington Street are shielded from the noise of the M4 motorway by homes west and north of Young Street.

These homes will be acquired to make way for the construction of the WestConnex, hence the residents of North Strathfield will lose their sound and visual barriers to the motorway.

Residents in Sydney Street and Carrington Street do not want to gaze out to a maze of freeway networks, as a result.

We request that sound barriers be installed at the back of the homes in the northern end of Carrington Street. After construction these homes will be exposed to the expanse of the Westconnex interchange. In the EIS there is no provision for a sound wall to be installed. We request a wall to be built.

We request that high sound walls that are also aesthetically pleasing be installed around the tunnel entry and exit point as well as the edge of the M4 motorway which faces the houses along Sydney Street. We also want landscaping established along these fences to absorb the sound.

The EIS claims that the sound to residents will remain the same. We don't believe this. We will have the acceleration and braking of trucks and cars entering and exiting the tunnel at the Concord Road interchange. We want high sound walls to reduce this noise.

Please consider these requests. In the grand scheme of a mortorway that is cost more than $15 billion, we consider these minor requests.

Regards
Alf Catalano

I strongly disagree with your environmental impact statement on the grounds of common sense.

This project will obviously lead to grid lock in the Newtown suburb especially in King St. To mitigate this King St will need to become a permanent clearway destroying many businesses and the highly prized Newtown culture.

There will be high pollution.

I am a 74 yo old aged pensioner and have lived in Newtown since 1980.

I oppose to the building of Westconnex. I believe this is a very poor use of tax payers money.

Speaking personally, there is no direct impact - I don't live that close to the affected area, if anything it is convenient to me.
However I believe this is poor long term planning and diverts money from public transport projects which provide a more sustainable solution.

westconnex is not a viable plan for a number of reasons, the proposed emission stacks in Haberfield are too close to a large primary school and children's center near Bunnings in Ashfield. both are very close to the stacks and will become a cause to health issues which in turn become potential class action law suits. the two exits in Haberfield lead into already congested traffic bottlenecks which occur regularly during rush hour. there are tunnels in the world designed without emission stacks. there is no point of allowing traffic through a partial tunnel until the final phase is completed. the only reason for this is a lack of finance and hoping to fulfill the tunnel from collected tolls. which is counting ones eggs before laid.

The WestConnex project has been dealt with terribly from it's onset. I am disgusted with the fact that the NSW Government is making a concious decision to poison the people of inner west Sydney instead of investing in public transport. Building smoke stacks near schools and homes is just not acceptable. Destroying the environment is not acceptable. Taking people's homes is not acceptable. Offering below market rates for property is not acceptable. I challenge the NSW Government to hold their heads high and make an about-turn by listening to their people. I challenge them to show other governments that this is the way to govern, and that they care about the people of NSW.

The EIS indicates that the ventilation structures will be positioned in a manner which minimises any adverse environmental impacts. The proposed positioning of a ventilation stack near the corner of Parramatta Road and Frederick St is clearly going to have adverse impacts on stakeholders, including residents living in this area, young people at the juvenile justice centre and the children attending The Infants' Home child care centre on Henry St behind Bunnings. What justification can the proponents of this project provide to demonstrate that the positioning of this ventilation stack will not have adverse impacts, particularly on these young people and children? If appropriate justification cannot be found, I request that this planning decision be reviewed.

I have numerous objections to the M4East tunnel project in its current form, and also the decision unilaterally made by the government to begin contract allocation before the EIS has even been released or having obtained full planning approval.
As has been the case with other major projects, there appears to have been a reactive process driving planning without due considerationor laterality to other ideas/proposals which have less impact on both the environment and the disruption of a listed Heritage suburb... Haberfield being the oldest Federation area in Australia.
A vast amount of money has been allocated to a very small piece of infrastructure which doesn' t manage to fully encompass all the aspects of the problems, in fact adds others, such as increasing rat-running into areas not built to cope with any amount of traffic beyond local movements.
Much smaller amounts of investment would address problems better such as better and more efficient public transport, inclusion of bike lanes and/or improve the Greenway network.
Ashfield Council area has the least amount of green space of any council in Australia yet there is always money for projects which are not well-thought out and objected to by the majority of local and non-local community, planners, politicians etc

I oppose about this $15.4 billion polluting tollway and this should be invested in public transport. Too little too late for the work being done is only a catch up, not a plan for the next 10-20 years. C'mon!

I oppose about this $15.4 billion polluting tollway and this should be invested in public transport. Get your act together! The works being done aren't enough for the investment being put in.

I possie this $15.4 billion polluting tollway and should be investing the money in public transport.

This is NOT a letter in opposition to the m4 east extension. I see the extension as vital to Sydney's growing population and therefore it's ever increasing traffic issues.
I am writing to propose an alternative to the current planned use of Haberfield as its entrance and exit point.
I have lived on Hawthorne Pde in Haberfield for 20 years and in that time I have grown accustomed to Sydney's morning peak hour traffic preventing me from exiting my street onto Marion st or to turning right onto the city west link at waratah st. It is necessary for me to drive so I have no alternative but to sit and wait in Haberfield traffic along with my fellow Sydney's siders, most of whom have approached Haberfield from suburbs that are further away. I'm sure you are aware that there are many arterial roads that lead into Haberfield and the 2 lanes from Parramatta Rd along the city west link to the Crescent cannot cope with the large volume of cars at peak hour.
Haberfield has a very low property turnover rate because Haberfield is a lovely place to live. Haberfield has wonderful schools, local shops, parks and a strong sense of community and as a result Haberfield is extremely expensive. House prices in Haberfield range from 2 to 4.5 million dollars. I'm am certain that the residence that are having their homes acquired will be compensated for the loss of their homes, and most will want to stay in Haberfield therefore costing the tax payers billions in compensation.
The alternative of using Rozelle Rail yard as the entrance and exit point would be more effective in solving the current traffic problems and cheaper as it does not require the government compensating people for the compulsory acquisition of their property. The use of Rozelle would be less disruptive as it would give the construction tunnel a dedicated work zone.
I would be happy to meet with you to discuss the M4 east currant plans and do hope that you consider the cheaper more effective option.