WestConnex - M4 East Upgrade

My name is Emma Slade. I am a resident of Haberfield.

I am very concerned about the latest preferred design of the Westconnex and it's potential impact on our local community - in particular resident health and safety not to mention flow of traffic and community movement from Haberfield into the very busy and popular Livvi's Playground located in Timbrell Park.

Surely you want a successful Westconnex. Dropping traffic from the West onto the already bottlenecked City West Link at Haberfield is not the answer. Why is there a dedicated right hand turn lane for tunnel only traffic into Haberfield via Waratah St. I would be surprised if anyone from the West is travelling to Haberfield.

The right design would be to take the tunnel from the M4 exit all the way to the Rozelle Railyards sparing local communities and to use intunnel ventilation rather than exhaust stacks.

We have 565 residents who have all signed a local petition that says the following:

28th July 2015
I call upon Tony Abbott, Mike Baird, Duncan Gay, Jodi McKay, Luke Foley and Jo Haylen to rethink the current proposal and remove the entry/exit point for the Westconnex tunnel on the City West Link, Haberfield from any preferred plan along with the ventilation stacks, electrical substation, etc in Walker Ave, Haberfield.
It has been indicated that this entry/exit point on the City West Link will only be 'busy' until the further tunnel to the Rozelle Rail Yards is completed. It makes more sense to continue the tunnel to this site sooner rather than later sparing our heritage conservation area of unnecessary road works, home acquisitions and pollution.
An exit point from the West onto the already bottle necked City West Link is short sighted and will direct traffic into our community, that would otherwise NOT use our local streets. The addition of unfiltered ventilation stacks is not only dangerous for residents in general but for the children attending school nearby unacceptable. The Channel Tunnel from the UK to France is 37.9 km's long, the Seikan Tunnel in Japan is 53.85kms long and the Mount Blanc Tunnel is 15 kms long, all without the need for ventilation/exhaust stacks. However we are being told we must have them here in Australia. Why ? The technology is available and the right solution is to run the tunnel from the M4 exit all the way to the Rozelle rail yard at the Anzac Bridge. In doing so, motorists would wipe 18 traffic lights from their journey.
The incorrectly conceived and latest preferred version will result in cars exiting the new tunnel onto the City West Link/Wattle St (which is, and will after completion remain a crawl in peak hour), view the extensive traffic due to 7 sets of traffic lights before getting to the Anzac Bridge and then make use of the proposed dedicated right hand turn from the tunnel into Waratah St. Attempting to bi-pass the obvious traffic jam will bring increased traffic from the tunnel to our local community by non-residents using Haberfield/Leichhardt as a rat run. Similarly on the route back to the tunnel along the City West Link from the City, motorists will again use our local roads to bi-pass traffic through Leichhardt/Haberfield re-entering the tunnel via Waratah St.
The proposed dedicated right hand turn into Waratah St from the tunnel exit will result in these extra vehicles directly passing a number of local primary schools, pre-schools, care facilities as well as child care centers.
The first 2 sets of lights encountered (Waratah St and Timbrell Drive) immediately after exiting the proposed tunnel on the City West Link/Wattle St exit are used extensively by the local community to enter Timbrell Park and the Bay Run. The proposed increased width of Wattle St at Waratah St by two extra lanes will ensure the time residents take to cross the road is increased , hence holding traffic for longer at the Red Light, further banking up traffic in the tunnel.

We call on you to ensure the tunnel does not have an entry/exit point in our Garden Suburb, but rather continues to the Rozelle Rail Yard and that the proposed unfiltered ventilation stacks, electrical substation, etc are removed and intunnel ventilation be utilized instead. Common sense and a better solution is available and is one that is the best all round solution for all LOCAL areas including our heritage conservation area.
I await your urgent reply.

I just wanted the designers to consider raising the height of the centre barrier so drivers would not be able to see break downs and the like, as this severely affects the traffic flow in the opposite direction of the incident, i think it is called rubbernecking.

To Whom It May Concern,

I make the following submission to the Environmental Impact Statement exhibition for the Westconnex M4 East Tunnel Project (SSI6307).

I am deeply opposed to the construction of the M4 East Tunnel and outraged at the arrogance and disregard of the health and safety of the community. Plans to place unfiltered smoke stacks in residential areas are ill-conceived at best, and look to be made with an eye for profit before public health. The government has ignored the community's right to information by signing contracts before releasing the EIS, before disclosure of the full business case, and before receiving planning approval.

I want the following issues to be addressed:

Smoke stacks should be moved from the current proposed location to areas away from schools and childcare centres.
Smoke stacks must be filtered - it seems inconceivable to me that this is not a given, with the risk to health of local residents inherent in concentrated emissions.
Local traffic concerns must be addressed - with the current plan, during both construction and after the proposed tunnel is completed, neighbourhoods will be divided, local traffic is set to become even more congested, and "rat runs" through neighbourhood streets will become the new normal.
Residents affected by compulsory acquisitions must be compensated properly. There have been numerous stories in the media about residents being forced out of their suburb due to their not receiving the correct market value for their homes.

Yours Sincerely,



Alyson Howland

To Whom It May Concern,

I make the following submission to the Environmental Impact Statement exhibition for the Westconnex M4 East Tunnel Project (SSI6307).

I am deeply opposed to the construction of the M4 East Tunnel and outraged at the arrogance and disregard of the health and safety of the community. Plans to place unfiltered smoke stacks in residential areas are ill-conceived at best, and look to be made with an eye for profit before public health. The government has ignored the community's right to information by signing contracts before releasing the EIS, before disclosure of the full business case, and before receiving planning approval.

I want the following issues to be addressed:

Smoke stacks should be moved from the current proposed location to areas away from schools and childcare centres.
Smoke stacks must be filtered - it seems inconceivable to me that this is not a given, with the risk to health of local residents inherent in concentrated emissions.
Local traffic concerns must be addressed - with the current plan, during both construction and after the proposed tunnel is completed, neighbourhoods will be divided, local traffic is set to become even more congested, and "rat runs" through neighbourhood streets will become the new normal.
Residents affected by compulsory acquisitions must be compensated properly. There have been numerous stories in the media about residents being forced out of their suburb due to their not receiving the correct market value for their homes.

Yours Sincerely,



Nathan Brand

Dear Planners,

I agree that transport across greater Sydney needs improvement.
But I am at a loss as to why a large road project is being built at all when we could invest our limited resources into better public and active transport.

It is well established that new roads create more road use; I'm sure you are familiar with the concept of 'induced demand'.

Co-ordinated public transport, planned so that transfers from service to service are as seamless as possible, would deliver a cleaner and more people-friendly result.

I think the whole project is environmentally negative because it will lead to more cars on our roads. The major beneficiaries of this project will be the developers and their allies, not the people of Sydney.

yours sincerely,

Sylvia Florin

I wish to say that putting tolling along the length of the new and existing M4 is going to cost the residents of western Sydney a lot of money. people are already spending a lot of money to get to and from work and its been really great that the M4 has been toll free.

I want no tolling on the existing M4 and if you must have tolling out it on the new part of the M4 only. Labor took the M4 toll away and your government want to bring it back and that's not OK.

Major cities throughout the world have a range of public transport options. In particular, a light rail/underground public transport system like the Tube in London or the Metro in Paris means most people travel using public transport and few require to drive to the city by car (or even own a car). THAT is how to solve Sydney's transport needs, as well as decreasing pollution. Sydney's buses are just extra large obstructions on the roads and actually hold up traffic. WestConnex just encourages more traffic, more pollution, destroys suburbs like Haberfield (a heritage suburb!) and funnels more cars into areas where there will still be blockages. And the policy of forcibly evicting people from their homes is just obscene - something you might expect in Russia or North Korea but not in Australia. The dumping of more traffic onto the already congested City West link, with its many cross streets and traffic lights is just plain stupid. There's a beautiful bay with scenic views of the water which would be so much improved by removing traffic lanes from running alongside, instead of adding even more. Make it possible for people from Sydney's west to get to and from the city by light rail and Sydney will be much more liveable for everyone. Build huge roadways to and from the West is just crazy, especially because they all end up somewhere where the traffic will be blocked anyway.

Dear friends from the Department of Planning and Environment greetings

I am here to make a submission regrading the plan of allowing M4 Tunnel to turn from Neich Prade and cut through part of my neighbours and mine properly on Neich Prade.

The initial plan was to have the Tunnel going right under Parramatta Road in order to minimise impacts, but now this is changed - we are curious why it has to turn from Neich Pde, impacting on so many residential properties from Burwood and Croydon onwards.

We are very disappointed and upset that this change of plan is very different from the initial draft. We are unhappy that the turn on the plan is now cutting a portion of our property on no. 10, and yet, it deliberately avoids the high-rise property that is currently being built and another one planned to be built on Burwood Road which is also expected to go higher to 10 storeys.

We see this turn has a significantly impacted on our property's future value as we understand some developers prefer higher buildings (8 storeys rather than 6), which, will need deeper foundations. We fear such a turn will exclude us from the possible chance of selling our property at a reasonable price compared with the rest of the neighbours, and we fear that future noises will affect our sleeps at night.

We find the turn very strange and unreasonable, inconsistent with the initial plan, and we see this will serious impact on our property value should there be an opportunity for us to sell.

I hope the Department may reconsider this plan and make some sensible changes in order to minimise residential impacts on Neich Prade.

Best regards

Paul Wei

I was born in Los Angeles. Now I live in Ashfield, NSW. I really hope our city does not go down the same road (no pun intended) as LA. Westconnex essentially pivots our city's future development away from public transport infrastructure and toward more and more roads to support more and more roads, creating more cars and air pollution and destroying public space.
My suburb is a good example of how public transport can work well to move people. Why are we blowing our budget on a tollroad?

I make this submission about the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the WestConnex project.

Noise Abatement actions have been planned to retain some quality of life for residents adjoining the Wattle St Interchange(Fig 5.27 Noise Barrier Locations Map2; NW_Wattle_01A and NW_Wattle_01B). However, residents of Loftus and Chandos Streets have been ignored. Little is being done to minimise the impact on residents at the Parramatta Rd Interchange, despite the fact that there are more residents impacted along these streets than on Walker Avenue.

While some Loftus and Chandos St properties have been identified as potentially being eligible to apply for Architectural Mitigation, this is not always achievable or suitable for older style homes with lead light windows. Discussions at Westconnex information sessions also admit Apartment blocks are particularly hard to mitigate due to common property access. This proposed solution is not acceptable and does not address noise issues in outdoor entertainment areas.

Ground floor and first floor apartments on Loftus St will back on to the Parramatta Rd Interchange, and would benefit from a 5 metre Noise Abatement Wall behind their rear boundary down to 19 Loftus St. This could be carried on past Chandos St(making this a permanent Cul de Sac) sweeping away from 77 Chandos St., through the land remaining of 83 Chandos St(being acquired) and continuing past the townhouses and apartments at 98 Chandos St. The wall would finish at the current old Brescia Furniture site.

Loftus St and Chandos St residences definitely fall within the feasibility of Noise Walls as defined in the EIS in section 5.8.6 paragraph 2 (next paragraph).

"Generally, noise barriers (which can include walls and earth mounds) are most feasible where residences are closely grouped, where the barriers do not impede access to properties and where they are visually acceptable. Conversely, noise barriers are not cost effective for isolated dwellings. In addition, where driveway access to properties must be maintained, the overall noise reduction provided by the barrier is compromised by the need to install an access gate"

No property access will be affected and the wall would only need overlap in the Chandos Street Cul de Sac to provide pedestrian and cycle access to Parramatta Rd footpath.

At WestConnex information sessions residents were advised that noise abatement walls are not proposed for the Parramatta rd Interchange because RMS may want to develop the land remaining from acquisitions post completion. This shows a lack of concern about the impact on local residents, which should be the priority.

There is only about 9 metres of usable land from 7 Loftus St down to Chandos St. Surely this could be better used for Noise Abatement through a Wall and Trees, to benefit the residents?

I urge you to reconsider Chandos St as a Cul de Sac and the provision of Noise Abatement Walls.

Yours Sincerely,

Demi

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 categorically opposed to the construction of the M4 East Tunnel. I do not believe that spending $15.4 billion to achieve a 6 minute travel time saving is justified. I reject the government's handling of the project, signing contracts to build this road before releasing this 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 have concerns about pollution as well as the overarching issue that this significant investment - and its protracted inconvenience - should be directed to a public transport, low-emission, long-term solution.

I want the following addressed from the EIS:

Filter the smoke stacks and relocate away from schools and childcare centres.

Build a noise wall for properties in Ashfield next to the Parramatta Rd interchange, during and after construction.

Stop rat-running through Haberfield and Ashfield, by removing the right turn into Waratah St, Haberfield and close Chandos St at Parramatta Rd after construction.

Offer voluntary acquisitions and WDA-funded dilapidation reports for those properties near construction sites in Northcote, Wolseley, Wattle, Walker, Ramsay, Chandos and Loftus Streets.

Restrict tunnelling 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.

Critically, however, I believe that this project will not solve Sydney's traffic problems and NSW taxpayers 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.

Dear Sir/ Madam,
I wish to make a submission in response to the EIS for WestConnex. As a resident directly affected by the new motorway, I would like the following:

1. An aesthetic sound barrier wall to be installed along Sydney Street (northern end) once construction has finished. This wall needs to be visually interesting and provide a noise barrier from the freeway.

2. Trees and hedges be planted against this wall to provide further sound and visual barriers.

3. Substantial planting along the southern side of Sydney Street (between exit of M4 and Concord Road) to provide a visual barrier from the motorway.

4. Large and effective sound barriers be build surrounding the entry and exit points of the tunnel at the Concord Interchange.

5. A sound barrier to be build along the motorway facing the residents of Sydney Street. This sound barrier should be interesting to look at and be populated with trees and hedges.

6. That Westconnext authority pay for the establishment of a park at the northern end of Sydney street where houses have been acquired.

7. That homes in Carrington Street be assessed before and after tunnelling to asssess for cracks as a result of tunnel boring.

thank you.

To whom it may concern,

M4 East Parramatta Rd Interchange.

Noise Abatement Wall between Orpington St (along Loftus
St) and Old Brescia Site:

Loftus St and Chandos St residences definitely fall within the feasibility of Noise Walls as defined in the EIS in section 5.8.6 paragraph 2 (next paragraph).

It states in the EIS that the reason noise walls are not feasible is the possible! future use of the residual land for a transport corridor. As history tells us this possible! future is decades away and if at all and is unacceptable to expect the residents to linger in the cacophony of the Parramatta road interchange waiting indefinitely.

Loftus St will back on to the Parramatta Rd Interchange, and would benefit from a 5 metre Noise Abatement Wall behind their rear boundary down to 19 Loftus St. This could be carried on past Chandos St(making this a permanent Cul de Sac) sweeping away from 77 Chandos St., through the land remaining of 83 Chandos St(being acquired) and continuing past the town houses and apartments at 98 Chandos St. The wall would finish at the current old Brescia Furniture site.

No property access will be affected and the wall would only need overlap in the Chandos Street Cul de Sac to provide pedestrian and cycle access to Parramatta Rd footpath.

The residents of Loftus and Chandos St should not be ignored while residents along other corridors such as Wattle street are proposed to have a noise wall installed.

Sincerely
Domenic Liberatore

I object to it for the following two reasons:
1. The design is impacting financially owners of properties directly near or above, including mine, and no compensations being offered and it is unfair to financially burden us as there for the benefit of the state. There are clear evidence of properties above or near the proposed route are being unable to sell or are being sold 20%-30% less than comparable properties that are located one street away.
2. The design to transform Concord Road / M4 into a massive inter-change is not desirable for local community due to traffic congestion, noise and air pollution and aesthetic concerns.

There are no credible and fully explained reasons given in the EIS to not to go with the original concept of building the motorway under Parramatta Road instead of under residential properties.

If the project goes ahead, I would like the following to be addressed:
1. Currently people from Carrington Street can easily walk to Strathfield rail way station. The design needs to accommodate pedestrian paths which is short and easy to walk and reach Strathfield station

2. Each houses to be notified when tunnel boring is about to commence below those houses, including the time/date start and end

3. M4 East development works to contain integrating elements with the Parramatta Road redevelopment initiatives: access (foot bridges) for people to easily move between Concord Road/Queens Road area and Parramatta Road area to benefit the amenities available in both areas

4. Aesthetic sound and visual barriers on both sides of the existing M4 bridge on top of railway

5. An aesthetic sound barrier wall to be installed at the back of the houses in the northern end of Carrington Street. We want this wall to serve two purposes - to be visually interesting and provide a barrier to the noise from the freeway.

6. Trees and hedges be planted against this wall to provide further sound and visual barriers.

7. Aesthetically pleasing sound barrier walls along the motorway that runs in front of the remaining houses in Sydney Street.

8. Substantial planting along the southern side of Sydney street - (between exit of M4 and concord Road) - to provide a visual barrier from the motorway.

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

10. Assurances that these green spaces will not become areas to dump rubbish. This is already evident in small green space at the Sydney Street exit of the M4 motorway (end of Queen Lane). How will they be looked after? Whose responsibility will they be? The use of these open spaces is not clear.

11. The green space at the at the Sydney Street exit of the M4 (end of Queen Lane) be turned into a community park.

12. As a concession to the upheaval that residents are facing as a result of the WestConnex- we want substantial tree 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. These were never replaced. (This is at the bottom of our street in Carrington Street).

13. Trucks not be allowed to access the construction zone via Carrington Street.

14. Houses that are on top of the underground tunnel be assessed for cracks before tunnelling begins and after wards. Any cracks which have resulted in tunnelling will be compensated.

I object to Westconnex in its current form and recommend the Government investigate the opportunity to reduce costs through a combined rail + road tunnel for the M4 East (with reduced number of lanes) and the fast-west metro rail line (southern alignment option) proposed to Sydney Metro public consultation and also available here:
https://sites.google.com/site/drdavidcthorp/transport/fast-cbd-parramatta-rail

Attention Director Infrastructure Projects, Planning Services Department of Planning and Environment Application number SSI 6307

I reside in the units located at 98 Chandos street Ashfield which will be affected by the Westconnex buildings to take place.
As a concerned resident, my unit currently faces directly onto Parramatta Road and is currently 12 metres from Parramatta Road.

As a resident of this complex we propose to you that a noise reducing wall be built as part of the restructure to prevent further noise deterioration concerning our property and residents.
This request is not unreasonable considering building is to take place around 98 Chandos street over the coming years with no solid proposal to reduce the noise for myself and other concerned residents.

We propose a concrete wall be built to shield 98 Chandos street from the noise over the coming years of building the Westconnex and also for future noise reduction.

This will be followed by further advice and letters from other concerned residents at 98 Chandos street Ashfield.

Sincerely


Sofia Stavropoulos
47/98 Chandos Street
Ashfield

I as a resident of Haberfield for over 20 years am very deeply concerned regarding noise barriers on the section of road between Waratah and Martin st. I am aware that there will be No barriers installed. I live on Alt st and am already experiencing a vast amount of noise from the traffic on dobroyd parade. i request that Noise barriers be installed to reduce an obvious increase of noise that will probably eventuate from the tunnel entrances. Also it would make the entrances to dwellings already on dobroyd parade be safer.

To whom it may concern,

Noise Abatement actions have been planned to retain some quality of life for residents adjoining the Wattle St Interchange(Fig 5.27 Noise Barrier Locations Map2; NW_Wattle_01A and NW_Wattle_01B). However, residents of Loftus and Chandos Streets have been ignored. Little is being done to minimise the impact on residents at the Parramatta Rd Interchange, despite the fact that there are more residents impacted along these streets.

While some Loftus and Chandos St properties have been identified as potentially being eligible to apply for Architectural Mitigation, this is not always achievable or suitable for older style homes with lead light windows. Discussions at Westconnex information sessions also admit apartment blocks are particularly hard to mitigate due to common property access. This proposed solution is not acceptable and does not address noise issues in outdoor entertainment areas such as decks, patios and back yards.

Ground floor and first floor apartments on Loftus St will back on to the Parramatta Rd Interchange, and would benefit from a 5 metre Noise Abatement Wall behind their rear boundary down to 19 Loftus St. This could be carried past Chandos St(making this a permanent Cul de Sac) sweeping away from 77 Chandos St., through the land remaining of 83 Chandos St(being acquired) and continuing past the townhouses and apartments at 98 Chandos St. The wall would finish at the current old Brescia Furniture site.

Loftus St and Chandos St residences definitely fall within the feasibility of Noise Walls as defined in the EIS in section 5.8.6 paragraph 2 (next paragraph).

"Generally, noise barriers (which can include walls and earth mounds) are most feasible where residences are closely grouped, where the barriers do not impede access to properties and where they are visually acceptable. Conversely, noise barriers are not cost effective for isolated dwellings. In addition, where driveway access to properties must be maintained, the overall noise reduction provided by the barrier is compromised by the need to install an access gate"

No property access will be affected and the wall would only need overlap in the Chandos Street Cul de Sac to provide pedestrian and cycle access to Parramatta Rd footpath.

At WestConnex information sessions residents were advised that noise abatement walls are not proposed for the Parramatta rd Interchange because RMS may want to develop the land remaining from acquisitions post completion. This shows a lack of concern about the impact on local residents, which should be the priority.

There is only about 9 metres of usable land from 7 Loftus St down to Chandos St. Surely this could be better used for Noise Abatement through a Wall and Trees, to benefit the residents?

I urge you to consider making Chandos St a Cul de Sac and the provision of Noise Abatement Walls.

I object to the Westconnex scheme. Making more motorways into cities only encourages more car use and stress in those who live, work and play in cities. I am currently in London and fast efficient train services take cars off the roads, as do similar bus and light rail services. Last week I was in Madrid and Seville and public use of car - free pedestrian squares was wonderful to see. People who can walk enjoy walking and using the very good public transport. We get healthier this way. I was impressed by the number of people I saw using wheelchairs who could get around because of less tyranny of car use. It saddens me greatly to see Sydney being filled with ugly, quickly erected apartment blocks along already congested roads choked with noisy, smelly traffic. I know we can do better than using this retrograde model in our great city. The rest of the world is rapidly realising the futility of the Westconnex-style motorcentric scheme. Why are we embracing it??

RE: Exhaust stack near Wattle Street and Parramatta Road.
This needs to be filtered. It is in the communities health interest. If it is not filtered, in the long term this will cost the government more in health costs and potential legal matters.