WestConnex - M4 East Upgrade

I write to express my strong objection to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal.

Global experience on experience of tollroad construction has demonstrated conclusively that these projects are enormously expensive and counter-productive. This tollroad will increase air pollution and encourage more car use, quickly filling the increased road capacity. It is not a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem.

The fact that the State Government has already signed multi-billion dollar contracts for WestConnex before this EIS was even placed on public exhibition undermines community confidence that this is a genuine consultation process.

I object to this proposal as it:

Fails to provide a long term solution to traffic and congestion.
Robs the limited NSW budget of funds to invest in much needed public transport.
Will direct additional traffic into already heavily congested streets, like Parramatta and Victoria Roads.
Requires the demolition and compulsory acquisition of hundreds of homes.
Fails to compare this project against alternative public transport projects.
Is not justified by any publicly-released business case.
Kind Regards,
Celia Brown

Dear Sirs / Madams, I strongly object to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal as this enormous project will be very expensive yet not achieve its objectives. As overseas experience has demonstrated, projects like this increase air pollution, detract from public transport and actively encourage more people to use cars, filling up the road, rapidly using up the increased road capacity. The WestConnex M4 East motorway is NOT a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem. The fact that the State Government signed multi-billion dollar contracts for the development of this scheme PRIOR to the Environment Impact Statement even being put on public display seriously undermines any suggestion of a genuine consultation process. The EIS enunciates BENEFITS for all stages of the project ... but does not address the NEGATIVE impacts along the whole route. The principal objections to this proposal are:
1. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, encourage MORE CARS instead of PUBLIC TRANSPORT. It would fail to provide a long term solution to traffic and congestion. If you build more roads, you just get more cars. It is as simple as that.
2. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, create significant air pollution and damage the health and wellbeing of people who live nearby, especially children.
3. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, divide local communities and force hundreds of people out of their homes and neighbourhoods. It will do enormous damage to the fabric of Sydney's inner west community, including small businesses and families.
4. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, contribute to Australia's greenhouse gas emission and global warming by promoting an increase in fuel consumption and creating significant air pollution. This is not progress. It is regressive. Last century.
5. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, pollute local waterways and groundwater, and destroy precious green space and parklands that are so important to the local community.
6. This proposal fails to include any evaluation or consideration of alternative public transport options.
7. This proposal is not justified by any publicly-released business case.
In short, this is a community destroying, polluting, regressive and economically suspect proposal. It ignores best practice in overseas urban transport development and relegates Sydney to more congestion and expense. It's short sighted, narrow vision, potentially very expensive for future generations and not a long term solution at all. Please reconsider.

To the Director, Major Planning Assessments, Department of Planning

I write to express my strong objection to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal.

Global experience of major toll road construction has demonstrated conclusively that these projects are enormously expensive and counter-productive. WestConnex will increase air pollution and encourage more car use, quickly filling the increased road capacity. It is not a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem.

The fact that the State Government has already signed multi-billion dollar contracts for WestConnex before this EIS was even placed on public exhibition undermines community confidence that this is a genuine consultation process.

This EIS considers benefits for all stages of the project but doesn't address the negative impacts along the whole route.

Implementing this proposal will have devastating impacts on local communities. As a resident of a community that stands to be affected, I object.

Submission: WestConnex M4 East EIS (SSI 6307)

I wish to express my STRONGEST OBJECTION to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal. If built it will generate additional traffic, funnelling it into heavily congested middle-ring and inner city roads, requiring the demolition of hundreds of homes and businesses to make way for road widenings on the surface road network to distribute the traffic from the motorway.

I also wish to register my OBJECTION to the government awarding tenders for the project before a full business case has been publicly released and before the EIS had been published and the public has exercised its right of participation.
The EIS process is supposed to allow for genuine PUBLIC INPUT and to result, potentially, in approval, non-approval, or approval with modifications, of the project. The present procedure makes a mockery of that right.

Government funding for this proposal - as part of the whole WestConnex proposal - will claim an extraordinary proportion of the state transport budget for years to come. This being the case, as a TAXPAYER I am MORE THAN OUTRAGED that the EIS has failed to discuss, honestly and fully, its social, environmental, and economic impacts or to explain why it is preferable to other, alternative public- and active transport solutions.

In particular I draw attention to the EIS's failure to:

* Factor into the traffic modelling the very large increase in apartment construction - and therefore of population - that has been promoted by the WestConnex Delivery Authority and other agencies as a major rationalisation for the proposal.

* Honestly discuss public transport and freight rail alternatives.

* Publish a robust business case to justify expenditure of billions of dollars worth of taxpayers' funds.

* Properly describe the long term impacts of air pollution generated by the increased traffic volumes the project is designed to facilitate.

* Consider more sustainable public and active transport options that will produce a lower level of greenhouse gas emissions.

Decades-long global experience of urban motorway construction has demonstrated conclusively that big new urban roads are counterproductive. They generate a flood of new road traffic and rapidly reach capacity. That is why, globally, they have fallen out of favour and are no longer seen as a solution to congestion.

WE WANT TO PRESERVE EXISTING INNER-CITY COMMUNITIES AS THEY ARE, AND TO ACT AS APPROPRIATE TO THIS TIME OF HUMAN EVOLUTION AND ITS ENVIRONMENT BY BUILDING MORE AND BETTER PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEMS AS WELL AS DISCOURAGING YET MORE TRAFFIC IN THE INNER-CITY.2574

I strongly object to the M4 East tunnel project and the entire WestConnex project, not only because of the potential impacts upon us as residents living near the City West Link in Lilyfield, but also because the overall premise of the plan is flawed. The solution to Sydney's significant transport problems will not be solved by building more roads.

In addition, I strongly object that:

- The EIS has been lodged before a full business case has been made.

- The government has awarded contracts worth billions of dollars of public money before any planning approval was given. This is a clear failure of due process that undermines any confidence the community could have in the project.

- The traffic modelling in the EIS is clearly deficient.

- The EIS consultation and display period has been rushed and inadequate. The community has not had sufficient time to comprehend the EIS, which contains numerous contradictions and inconsistencies, in order to develop a complete response.

- The EIS fails to consider and evaluate more effective public and freight transport options that will produce better outcomes at less environmental cost.

- The EIS's fails to fully evaluate and describe the long term impacts of air pollution generated by the increased traffic volumes the project is designed to facilitate.

- Hundreds of people are being forced from their homes and businesses and that over 290 properties will be compulsorily acquired for the M4 East alone.

- There will be years of 24-hour construction work which will have significant impacts on communities. There will be thousands of diesel truck movements a day. The EIS states that noise and vibration impacts will "cause stress and anxiety, affect the enjoyment of outdoor spaces and disturb normal indoor activities [and] sleep patterns with consequent impacts on health and wellbeing." This is unacceptable given the uncertainty of the project's effectiveness.

In light of the above, and the multiple other concerns generated by the rushed and inadequate approval process, there can be no confidence that the WestConnex project will achieve it's stated goals.

I write to express my strong objection to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal.

Global experience of major toll road construction has demonstrated conclusively that these projects are enormously expensive and counter-productive. WestConnex will increase air pollution and encourage more car use, quickly filling the increased road capacity. It is not a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem.

The fact that the State Government has already signed multi-billion dollar contracts for WestConnex before this EIS was even placed on public exhibition undermines community confidence that this is a genuine consultation process.

This EIS considers benefits for all stages of the project but doesn't address the negative impacts along the whole route.

The money proposed to be spent on WestConnex should instead be spent on upgrading public transport. This will have a much bigger impact on reducing congestion as adding more road capacity will only result in more traffic and the same problem existing in the near future.

The lack of transparency surrounding this project is a major concern. Contracts have been signed, councils have not been adequately consulted and everything appears to be going ahead regardless of the outcome of the current process.

I wish to register my VERY strong objection to the WestConnex M4 East proposal.

I live on Parramatta Road and do not believe that this project will benefit my family nor will it benefit my suburb Haberfield or my city.

To suggest that my family's air quality will be improved is a nonsense and no credible data has been shown where this has happened anywhere in the world when such a project has been undertaken. How a responsible government could even contemplate concentrating and emitting dangerous vehicle exhaust emissions almost next to a school is scandalous. To plan to have UNFILTERED stacks is, in my opinion, bordering on the criminal and I am convinced that serious health effects of residents will ensue. The health risk and air quality analysis, fails to assess the true impact of the M4 East.

As a long time tax payer, I object to this hugely expensive and counterproductive toll road mega-project. WestConnex will increase air pollution and traffic, and expose NSW taxpayers to unacceptably high levels of financial risk. It is not a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem. Public transport is!

I find it disappointing to say the least that the State Government has already signed multi-billion dollar contracts for WestConnex before the EIS for this proposal was even placed on public exhibition. How can anyone believe that an impartial, transparent and corruption free process is being undertaken when the government appears to have already made a decision and the project is a fait accompli?

I attended a number of the so-called consultation sessions and I was shocked by the at best, lack of real detail and at its worst, obfuscation of the staff.

I recognise there is pressure on several NSW Departments, including Planning and the Environment, to approve this project. I remind public servants of their obligation to the public and to the potential social, health and economic costs of spending $15.4 billion on WestConnex when it provides no solution to Sydney's transport needs.

In regards to the M4 East EIS, I also strongly object to:

* The lack of transparency in the entire WestConnex process. Billions of dollars of contracts have been let without a full business case having been released or the project being subjected to independent Gateway reviews.
* The short 55-day timeframe in which members of the community have been given to respond to the EIS for the M4 East. This document runs to nearly 5,000 pages, but the public was only given 55 days to respond - despite hundreds of people calling and emailing the Minister for Planning to explain why this was not enough time.
* AECOM being paid millions of dollars of public funds to play the key role in the EIS for the M4 East. AECOM has been awarded other WestConnex contracts that give it a huge vested interest in the project going ahead, and this is demonstrated by the lack of independence and superficial analyses that characterise this EIS. In addition, AECOM has been sued for being negligent in relation to its past traffic studies, and has already paid more than $250m in settlement costs.
* Having each section of the Westconnex assessed separately. Vague rationales for the whole project are used to justify the serious negative impacts of each stage. Projects such as the Southern motorway F8, which are not even at a planning stage, are included in the argument for the project without explanation.
* The failure to consider total negative impacts against the total claimed positive aspects. While the M4 East EIS repeatedly makes references to the positive impact of the entire WestConnex when arguing for the project, it fails to consider the negative impacts of the whole project - such as loss of housing, heritage and biodiversity.
* The failure to provide enough data to allow independent experts to verify the M4 East EIS's traffic analysis. For example, a detailed study undertaken by SGS Economics & Planning for the City of Sydney concluded that WestConnex would make traffic worse on Parramatta Rd, Victoria St and many local roads. The M4 East EIS claims it will improve traffic, but offers very little data that would allow experts to objectively assess this analysis.
* Spending $15.4 billion for small savings that will not benefit most commuters. Instead of spending this amount of money to benefit a very small percentage of drivers in Sydney, and cut just one minute off overall road network traffic speeds, the NSW Government should be investing in public transport, traffic management solutions, and regional city centres to address traffic congestion and boost NSW's economic prosperity in the long term.
* The poor analysis of alternatives undertaken in the M4 East EIS. This section of the EIS is superficial and amounts to nothing more than a roundabout way of saying that the M4East tunnel project is preferred by WestConnex.
* The huge impact that the flow of cars and trucks out of tunnel exits will have on local roads through out the Inner West.
* Hundreds of residents being forced from their homes and businesses for the M4 East, and the failure of the EIS to assess the social impacts of this. Forcibly acquiring and destroying over 200 homes and businesses will result in massive social disruption in communities. There have been numerous reports of homeowners and tenants being inadequately compensated for the loss of their properties. These acquisitions were in motion before the EIS was even completed. Yet the EIS Social Impact study failed to do any direct research on the impact of forced acquisitions on residents.
* The health risk and air quality analysis, which fails to assess the true impact of the M4 East. The claim is even made that WestConnex will improve local air quality - which will surely make it the first motorway in history to do so!
* The total inadequacy of the M4 East biodiversity assessment. This `analysis' is based on insufficient studies. No attempt is made to assess cumulative impacts of the entire WestConnex project on loss of open space, gardens and other vegetation.
* The wholesale destruction of heritage homes and precincts. This is not acceptable, particularly for a project that will not resolve but add to Sydney's traffic congestions.
* The failure of WestConnex consultants to directly consult with business owners. Local business owners were not approached by WestConnex about the impact the M4 East would have on their livelihoods, despite the fact that many stand to see their businesses destroyed as thriving streets precincts are drowned in traffic.

I therefore call on the Minister for Planning to reject this proposal on the grounds that:

* Even the M4 East's inadequate traffic analysis shows that WestConnex will be at capacity by 2031.
* AECOM has not even met the basic Planning Secretary's requirements in its assessment.
* This is an outdated project that is not consistent with current trends in thinking about public transport, urban planning and livability of cities.

I also request a formal response to the concerns I have raised.

There are many issues relating to Westconnex: the absence of public transport options, the impacts on the amenity of hte inner suburbs - especially Haberfield - a suburb of high heritage values and amenity, and apparent favouring of car users over others, etc.

Public transport - v car
I lived in inner Sydney suburbs from late 1967 until mid 2014, with a few years in Brisbane, Newcastle and Buderim - where i live now and regularly visit Sydney. Over those decades, my use of public transport steadily increased. The reliability of the services and the increase in choice made the inner west a wonderful place to live. I have lived in the suburbs of Surrey Hills, Camperdown, Annandale, Rozelle and Lilyfield - the latter for 28 years. My Lilyfield and Leichhardt neighbours embraced the light rail- a wonderful and comfortable means of travel.
The Westconnex project is exhibited without adequate examination of other options. The Westconnex project appears to privilege car drivers travelling to and from the western suburbs over other transport travel destinations in the areas through which the route travels.
Where are the solutions for other transport destinations and needs?

Adverse environmental impacts
The WestConnex road has adverse impacts on the adjoining areas, through its appearance and by creating a large feature that separates the areas on either side. the most obvious impact is on the suburb of Haberfield- which is listed on the State Heritage Register. Haberfield is a planned suburb - an outstanding suburban development in the design of allotments and the houses- for which the develop provided support and advice. It is likely that Haberfield would also meet the thresholds for inclusion on the National Heritage Register. Westconnex involves the demolition of houses and the loss of open space adjoining.
Sydney's inner suburbs are one of the most successful aspects of Sydney as a metropolitan area. Community concerns about the impacts of roads were clearly expressed in the protests in the 1970s against proposed freeways though Glebe, Annandale and Rozelle, which resulted in the abandonment of those proposals and the use of the areas for public housing- a good outcome. It is apparent that the value and amenity of the inner suburbs from Haberfield to Glebe has not been given adequate consideration in the government's plans for Westconnex.
Westconnex will 'deliver' traffic to the Anzac bridge and Glebe, with impacts on traffic and parking in the nearby streets. the government needs ot think again- look at developing a broader policy for addressing transport needs for Sydney; a policy that delivers better public transport which encourages car owners to leave their cars at key locations and use public transport for journeys to and from Parramatta, and other key nodes in the metropolitan area.
I am sorry that I have not attached documents supporting my generalisations.

Over the 45+ years i have lived in Sydney I have increased my use of public transport- ending with using it for most travel, and hope that others, living further from the city centre than I can also receive good public transport services.
yours sincerely
Meredith Walker AM

I strongly object to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal.
It is quite clear that this massive project will be hugely expensive and will not achieve its objectives. As overseas experience has amply demonstrated, projects like this only increase air pollution and actively encourage more cars on to the road, rapidly using up any increased road capacity created.
The WestConnex M4 East motorway is NOT a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem.
The fact that the State Government signed multi-billion dollar contracts for the development of this scheme PRIOR to the Environment Impact Statement even being put on public display completely undermines my confidence that this is a genuine consultation process.
The EIS enunciates BENEFITS for all stages of the project ... but does not address the NEGATIVE impacts along the whole route.
The principal objections to this proposal are:
1. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, encourage MORE CARS instead of PUBLIC TRANSPORT. It would fail to provide a long term solution to traffic and congestion. If you build more roads, you just get more cars. It is as simple as that.
2. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, create significant air pollution and damage the health and wellbeing of people who live nearby, especially children.
3. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, divide local communities and force hundreds of people out of their homes and neighbourhoods. It will do enormous damage to the fabric of Sydney's inner west community, including small businesses and families.
4. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, contribute to Australia's greenhouse gas emission and global warming by promoting an increase in fuel consumption and creating significant air pollution. This is not progress. It is regressive. Last century.
5. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, pollute local waterways and groundwater, and destroy precious green space and parklands that are so important to the local community.
6. This proposal fails to include any evaluation or consideration of alternative public transport options.
7. This proposal is not justified by any publicly-released business case.
In short, this is a community destroying, polluting, regressive and economically suspect proposal.

I strongly object to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal.
It is quite clear that this massive project will be hugely expensive and will not achieve its objectives. As overseas experience has amply demonstrated, projects like this only increase air pollution and actively encourage more cars on to the road, rapidly using up any increased road capacity created.
The WestConnex M4 East motorway is NOT a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem.
The fact that the State Government signed multi-billion dollar contracts for the development of this scheme PRIOR to the Environment Impact Statement even being put on public display completely undermines my confidence that this is a genuine consultation process.
The EIS enunciates BENEFITS for all stages of the project ... but does not address the NEGATIVE impacts along the whole route.
The principal objections to this proposal are:
1. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, encourage MORE CARS instead of PUBLIC TRANSPORT. It would fail to provide a long term solution to traffic and congestion. If you build more roads, you just get more cars. It is as simple as that.
2. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, create significant air pollution and damage the health and wellbeing of people who live nearby, especially children.
3. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, divide local communities and force hundreds of people out of their homes and neighbourhoods. It will do enormous damage to the fabric of Sydney's inner west community, including small businesses and families.
4. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, contribute to Australia's greenhouse gas emission and global warming by promoting an increase in fuel consumption and creating significant air pollution. This is not progress. It is regressive. Last century.
5. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, pollute local waterways and groundwater, and destroy precious green space and parklands that are so important to the local community.
6. This proposal fails to include any evaluation or consideration of alternative public transport options.
7. This proposal is not justified by any publicly-released business case.
In short, this is a community destroying, polluting, regressive and economically suspect proposal.

I can not support the project when you have an untreated smoke stack so close to the Infants Home Ashfield. All three of my children attend the infants Home. My eldest has been hospitalised multiple times from respiratory issues and almost died. He is medicated daily and is in the care of a specialist respiratory paediatrician. The introduction of additional pollutants into the air so close to such a large and historical child care facility seems to lack any proper planning and quiet frankly may have lethal results.

I make the following submission in relation to the WestConnex Project. I strongly object to both the M4 East extension and the entire WestConnex project of which this is part, and request a reply to the following concerns:

1. I object to the lodging of the EIS before a full business case has been made public, and to billions of dollars of public money being signed away on contracts before any planning approval is given. This is a travesty of democratic and transparent planning.

2. I object to the traffic impacts that WestConnex, including the M4 East tunnel, will impose on Sydney's population. The Government's own figures for the first M4 widening stage of WestConnex show that re-imposing a toll on the current M4 will push thousands of cars and trucks onto alternate routes. The evidence in the EIS is that the M4 tunnel and the proposed M5 tunnel would already be full by 2031 and many local streets and intersections across the entire project would continue to be severely congested or even worse if the project is completed.

3. I object to hundreds of people being forced from their homes and businesses for the over 290 properties that will be compulsorily acquired for the M4 East. Many affected property owners report that the prices offered by the Government are grossly undervalued and they would not be able to buy in the same area.

4. I object to $15.4 billion being spent on this toll road instead of significant public and transport improvements.

5. I object to the fact that business owners were not consulted for the economic impact study.

6. I object to the impact that years of 24-hour construction work will have on communities. Across the route there will be thousands of truck movements a day. The EIS states that noise and vibration impacts will "cause stress and anxiety, affect the enjoyment of outdoor spaces and disturb normal indoor activities [and] sleep patterns with consequent impacts on health and wellbeing." This is TOTALLY unacceptable to me.

7. I object that Northcote Street will be blocked for three years at the Parramatta Road end - with a construction depot being built where the bottle shop and car yard are currently located. Over-sized semi-trailers will come into this depot and take away spoil they dig out of the tunnel. Residents will not have access to Parramatta Road during this time. This access is the only safe way of travelling east out of Northcote Street. The EIS does not address any modifications at the opposite end of the street to assist with traffic flow on to Ramsay Street.

8. I object to the undoubted fact that residents will see construction workers parking in and around their local streets.

9. I object to the toxic pollution that will come with the M4 East tunnel including unfiltered stacks. Pollution in local areas near the portals will be worse. Traffic pollution has been linked to higher rates of respiratory and heart disease and lung cancer. This is completely unacceptable given the high numbers of residents, businesses, schools, child and aged care facilities in the area.

I make the following submission in relation to the above EIS. I strongly object to both the M4 East extension and the entire Westconnex project of which this is in part, and request a reply to the following concerns:

1. I object to the lodging of the EIS before a full business case has been made public, and to billions of dollars of public money being signed away on contracts before any planning approval is given. This is a travesty of democratic and transparent planning.

2. I object to the traffic impacts that Westconnex, including the M4 East tunnel, will impose on Sydney's population. The government's own figures for the first M4 widening stage of Westconnex show that re-imposing a toll on the current M4 will push thousands of cars and trucks onto alternative routes - Parramatta Rd, the M2 and Victoria Rd. Research shows that toll roads only provide temporary relief from traffic congestion. The evidence in the EIS is that the M4 tunnel and the proposed M5 tunnel would already be full by 2031 and many local streets and intersections across the entire project would continue to be severely congested or even worse if the project is completed.

3. I object to hundreds of people being forced from their homes and businesses for the over 290 properties that will be compulsorily acquired for the M4 East. Many affected property owners report that prices offered by the Government are grossly undervalued and they would not be able to afford to buy in the same area.

4. I object to $15.4 billion being spent on this toll road instead of significant public and active transport improvements. Westconnex is already making living conditions worse for people in suburbs such as Granville and Auburn, and offers nothing to residents beyond Parramatta who have been treated like second-class citizens when it comes to public transport for far too long.

5. I object to the fact that business owners were not consulted for the economic impact study.

6. I object to the impact that years of 24-hour construction work will have on communities. Across the route there will be thousands of diesel truck movements a day. The EIS states that noise and vibration impacts will "cause stress and anxiety, affect the enjoyment of outdoor spaces and disturb normal indoor activities and sleep patterns with consequent impacts on health and wellbeing." This is totally unacceptable to me.

7. I object to the toxic pollution that will come with the M4 East tunnel including unfiltered stacks. Pollution in local areas near portals will be worse. Traffic pollution has been linked to higher rates of respiratory and heart disease and lung cancer, and impaired lung development in children. This is completely unacceptable given the high numbers of residents, businesses, schools, child and aged care facilities in the area.

I request the following
Abolition of concord interchange to reduce the the costs involved in buying housing and building the proposed overpass pedestrian bridge and it will also mean no ugly three level interchange
Request for concord rd not to be a main construction site for tunnelling as it will not be able to cope with the amount of heavy traffic resulting from the construction.it will also. Have an adversa affect on the residents of the area.
Request that the tunnel follow Parramatta Rs as originally designed to avoid future high level construction problems

Apart from conveying my consternation with regards to air pollution potentially affecting my home, work and my children's public school in Haberfield, as well as the destructive consequences that the forced property acquisitions have had for my immediate family, I would like to express my professional dissatisfaction with the quality of urban design outcomes being depicted within the EIS.

It goes without saying that the insertion of large scale infrastructure such as the Westconnex will have a large scale impact in the urban environment, particularly where below ground tunnels, and their necessary services, rise to the surface and meet existing built fabric and the public domain. However, the design consideration and design sensitivity with which these interventions can be implemented could potentially range from disastrous through to more acceptable. I find many of the images shown in Appendix L of the EIS ('Urban design, landscape character and visual impact assessment') to be deeply flawed and troubling from an urban design perspective. In some cases they seem to further worsen the already poor environment of Parramatta Road and its surrounds (if that is possible).

To be a responsible piece of public investment, it is essential that this scale and type of infrastructure improve the places it disturbs, leaving them better (or at least no worse) than the way it found them. It is plain to see on first impressions that this is not the case. Gaping tunnel holes (e.g. Figure 2.8), inaccessible useless green space (e.g. Figure 2.5), blank sound walls (e.g. Figure 6.75), nondescript grass verges with narrow footpaths alongside the carriageway (e.g. Figure 6.81) and imposing, bulky, bleak utilitarian services structures (e.g. Figure 6.84) are trademark design mistakes of past infrastructure projects that can be avoided, ameliorated or improved with the effort of design input.

It is clear that abundantly more design attention is required to achieve even a satisfactory outcome. It is emphatically suggested that the Government Architects Office Design Excellence unit become involved, or dramatically increase their involvement, to ensure that an improved standard is realised for these key sites within Sydney's Inner West. I implore the Government to raise the priority and level of design involvement in the implementation of this major project. Its impact, good or bad, will be widely felt in this city, now and far into the future.

I object to the construction of the Westconnex M4 East tunnel. In June 2015 the tunnel proposed route announced by Duncan Gay as being under Parramatta Road. In July 2015 the route was changed from under Parramatta Road to under residential houses.

I live in a 90 year old Californian Bungalow which has sustained significant cracks over the years due to the clay foundation. Geotec boring was conducted at the front of my neighbour's house during the first week of September. The results of the boring (to my knowledge) has not been released. The risk of damage as a direct result from the reverberation from tunnelling and detonations in addition to the use of the tunnel is a significant concern.

I have had quotes to have underpinning completed on the house which range from $30,000 to $55,000. The only recourse for damage sustained during construction is the condition report completed by the surveyor. This report has conditions that damage compensation will only be paid for damage incurred during the construction of the tunnel and not tunnel use.

I will be obtaining reports and recommendations from my own surveyor and engineer to determine and document the structural stability of the house. I will be doing this as the boring results have not been made public knowledge therefore the geology of the subterranial land is not known. It is my understanding that the risk of reverberation is determined by the amount of solid rock on top of the tunnel.

As this project is based primarily on money I would not be surprised if the tunnel went ahead despite boring results. The tunnel route was moved to make money so that high rise unit blocks could be built along Parramatta Road. No consideration or consultation was provided to residents affected by the route change. Westconnex staff door knocked during office hours when the majority of residents were at work. This resulted in numerous residents having no knowledge of the tunnel route change until August 2015.

The lack of communication and seemingly deceptive actions of Westconnex is disappointing and concerning to say the least. There were numerous conflicting statements made in the EIS including the varying depth reports which changed again with the subterranial land acquisition notice was received. The perceived deception of the conflicting statements in the EIS could be a result of the EIS being completed by AECOM, the same company who paid $280 million in settlement in one of the largest settlements in Australian Corporate history which related to misleading and deceptive conduct.

I object to the construction of the Westconnex M4 East tunnel. In June 2015 the tunnel proposed route announced by Duncan Gay as being under Parramatta Road. In July 2015 the route was changed from under Parramatta Road to under residential houses.

I live in a 90 year old Californian Bungalow which has sustained significant cracks over the years due to the clay foundation. Geotec boring was conducted at the front of my neighbour's house during the first week of September. The results of the boring (to my knowledge) has not been released. The risk of damage as a direct result from the reverberation from tunnelling and detonations in addition to the use of the tunnel is a significant concern.

I have had quotes to have underpinning completed on the house which range from $30,000 to $55,000. The only recourse for damage sustained during construction is the condition report completed by the surveyor. This report has conditions that damage compensation will only be paid for damage incurred during the construction of the tunnel and not tunnel use.

I will be obtaining reports and recommendations from my own surveyor and engineer to determine and document the structural stability of the house. I will be doing this as the boring results have not been made public knowledge therefore the geology of the subterranial land is not known. It is my understanding that the risk of reverberation is determined by the amount of solid rock on top of the tunnel.

As this project is based primarily on money I would not be surprised if the tunnel went ahead despite boring results. The tunnel route was moved to make money so that high rise unit blocks could be built along Parramatta Road. No consideration or consultation was provided to residents affected by the route change. Westconnex staff door knocked during office hours when the majority of residents were at work. This resulted in numerous residents having no knowledge of the tunnel route change until August 2015.

The lack of communication and seemingly deceptive actions of Westconnex is disappointing and concerning to say the least. There were numerous conflicting statements made in the EIS including the varying depth reports which changed again with the subterranial land acquisition notice was received. The perceived deception of the conflicting statements in the EIS could be a result of the EIS being completed by AECOM, the same company who paid $280 million in settlement in one of the largest settlements in Australian Corporate history which related to misleading and deceptive conduct.

I strongly object to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal.
It is quite clear that this massive project will be hugely expensive and will not achieve its objectives. As overseas experience has amply demonstrated, projects like this only increase air pollution and actively encourage more cars on to the road, rapidly using up any increased road capacity created.
The WestConnex M4 East motorway is not a long-term solution to Sydney's congestion problem.
The fact that the State Government signed multi-billion dollar contracts for the development of this scheme prior to the Environment Impact Statement even being put on public display completely undermines my confidence that this is a genuine consultation process.
The EIS enunciates benefits for all stages of the project ... but does not address the negative impacts along the whole route.
The principal objections to this proposal are:
1. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, encourage more cars instead of public transport. It would fail to provide a long term solution to traffic and congestion. If you build more roads, you just get more cars. It is as simple as that. Mitchell Road is already gridlocked many times in the day. The combination of WestConnex traffic and increased housing stock in the area will make our suburb unliveable.
2. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, create significant air pollution and damage the health and wellbeing of people who live nearby, especially children.
3. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, divide local communities and force hundreds of people out of their homes and neighbourhoods. It will do enormous damage to the fabric of Sydney's inner west community, including small businesses and families.
4. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, contribute to Australia's greenhouse gas emission and global warming by promoting an increase in fuel consumption and creating significant air pollution. This is not progress. It is regressive. Last century.
5. The WestConnex M4 will, if built, pollute local waterways and groundwater, and destroy precious green space and parklands that are so important to the local community. I am particularly worried about the environmental impact on Sydney Park, which has been developing as a significant, beautiful green space in our area.
6. This proposal fails to include any evaluation or consideration of alternative public transport options.
7. This proposal is not justified by any publicly-released business case.
In short, this is a community destroying, polluting, regressive and economically suspect proposal.

Vehicles currently pollute Sydney's air, noise pollution is high from vehicles in the Inner West and our native animals that manage to survive in the city are frequently hit by cars (along with pedestrians and cyclists). It is very ill-conceived to worse the Sydney environment with another large road. It makes far more environmental sense to invest in public transport and green corridors.

I am opposed to the construction of the M4 East Tunnel and believe the money would be better spent on public transport links and providing car parking at stations.
1. Filtration on the smoke stack. This project is costing billions, to say its too expensive to not filter it is not acceptable. Or saying that pollution is not increasing enough to justify it is not acceptable.
2. Move the smoke stack away from schools and childcare centres.
3. Asses the height of the stack. I went to an information session and they could not answer if the stack was increased X height what would the pollution decrease by. At a guess they said if you increase the stack by 5m it would decrease by 1/3. So why is it not increased by 5m?
4. 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.
5. Return acquired properties not required after construction to Ashfield Council for community use and public open space.
I am so disappointed that the contractor is already appointed and work is beginning before consultation.
Listen to the public. We don't want it.