WestConnex - M4 East Upgrade

I wish to express my strong 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, I am outraged that the EIS has failed to honestly and fully discuss 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.

I wish to express my strong objection to the M4 East motorway proposal. if built it will generate additional traffic, funnelling it into already heavily congested inner roads, requiring the demolition of many houses and businesses. I also wish to object to the government awarding tenders for the project before a full case has been released and before the EIS has been published and the community exercised its right of participation. The present procedure in fact makes a mockery of the democratic right of input and approval.Not only that, the whole proposal will see an extraordinary disproportionate amount of the state transit budget being tied up for years to come. I am outraged that the EIS has failed to honestly and fully discuss its social, environmental and economic inpact or to explain why it is preferable over other transport solutions.
I wish to draw your attention to the following failure of the EIS:
1. factor in the traffic modelling
2. honestly discuss public transport and freight rail alternatives
3. publish a robust business case justifying the expediture of billions of dolllars of taxpayer funds
4. properly describe the long term impact of air pollution generated by increased traffic volumes the project is designed to facilitate
5. consider more sustainable public and active transport options that will produce a lower level of greenhouse gas emissions.
Decades long experience of urban motorway construction has demonstrated conclusively that big new urban roads are counter productive. 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 congestion solution.
Please rethink approval of this project.

I object to this project.

We are already facing the Hugh rate of traffic from local developments plus repercussions of woeful public transport. The Westconnex delivering more than 100k cars in the area is disastrous for local residents.

If this is beneficial , why isn't the business case being released?

This motorway project is a major lost opportunity to create a liveable city. The induced traffic and cost of use are major issues as is the 'broken' tolling system which encourages 'rat running'.

The main problem is that it in fact will induce more people to spend more time in cars which is a horrible waste of human resources.

I wish to express my strong 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, I am outraged that the EIS has failed to honestly and fully discuss 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.

I am making the following submission to the EIS exhibition for the Westconnex M4 East Tunnel Project.

I object and am opposed to the construction of the M4 East tunnel.

I want the following addressed from the EIS
1) filter the emission stacks because Australia has no regulatory carbon dioxide emission standards to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels and its impact on climate change. As well, In Australia, there is a lack of effective environmental management of End-of-life vehicles. This is a hazard to health for adjacent streets and suburbs. The stacks must be located away from childcare centres and schools e.g
Ashfield Infants home, Haberfield public school.
2) stop rat running through Haberfield Streets, as a result of the building of the Westconnex, between Wattle and Dalhousie Streets by preventing all left hand turns from Parramatta Rd except for those with Traffic lights. This includes Alt St, Chandos st and Rogers Ave.
3) trucks turning from work zone into Bland st with full load of dirt is dangerous. there will be increased car traffic along Bland St due to school traffic as parents will try to protect their children from dangerous Truck traffic and drive them instead of allowing them to walk. This will create traffic jams due to trucks turning into Bland St and increased school traffic in vehicles due to safety concerns.
This project will not solve Sydney's traffic problems and NSW taxpayers money is better spent on Public Transport to reduce traffic along the M4 and M4 East tunnel.
Please consider my concerns and address them in your response to my submission.

I am making the following submission to the EIS exhibition for the Westconnex M4 East Tunnel Project.

I object and am opposed to the construction of the M4 East tunnel.

I want the following addressed from the EIS
1) filter the emission stacks because Australia has no regulatory carbon dioxide emission standards to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels and its impact on climate change. As well, In Australia, there is a lack of effective environmental management of End-of-life vehicles. This is a hazard to health for adjacent streets and suburbs. The stacks must be located away from childcare centres and schools e.g
Ashfield Infants home, Haberfield public school.
2) stop rat running through Haberfield Streets, as a result of the building of the Westconnex, between Wattle and Dalhousie Streets by preventing all left hand turns from Parramatta Rd except for those with Traffic lights. This includes Alt St, Chandos st and Rogers Ave.
3) trucks turning from work zone into Bland st with full load of dirt is dangerous. there will be increased car traffic along Bland St due to school traffic as parents will try to protect their children from dangerous Truck traffic and drive them instead of allowing them to walk. This will create traffic jams due to trucks turning into Bland St and increased school traffic in vehicles due to safety concerns.
This project will not solve Sydney's traffic problems and NSW taxpayers money is better spent on Public Transport to reduce traffic along the M4 and M4 East tunnel.
Please consider my concerns and address them in your response to my submission.

I support the abolition of the concord Interchange. I am immediately affected as my home is being acquired. My husband has brain injury, this home is precious to me and my kids, 9 and 12 years. 1) Volume 1, section 4.4.3 does not provide substantial reason in having Concord Interchange.
2)Lighthorse Interchange will have adverse impact in terms of visual and noise. It is uneccessary! 3) Concord Rd should not bea main construction site for tunnelling - this will be a greater disaster to current traffic levels and make local streets unbareable. 4)request for tunnel route to follow Parramatta Rd will have less construction impact and structural damage to current old properties. 5) Public transport needs to be improved instead of building roads to channel people faster through the city just to cause chaos on harbour bridge and military rd ultimately.!!! 6) no amount of stacks can be good for us. especially unfiltered ones!

Major concern with the change to tunnels the original proposed design to follow parramatta Rd reasons for change tunnels below parramatta rd would restrict the depths to which buildings
could be constructed basements or footings & restrict opportunities for urban vitalisation etc unjust and bias
moving too fast to destroy our homes over 100 years to 200 years old
there must be a much more important reason to have changed this design and not one of the disadvantages listed
we can but hope there will be an election before houses demolished and family lives dismissed as not important, we are all not convinced that the new plan for the tunnels has been fully investigated westconnex people are pushing ahead regardless the design has been rushed which is the reason for the many design changes to the westconnex project .the residents need to be respected and listened to not sending reams and reams of paper to our addresses but no one is respecting our concerns
Residents are very concerned this will be rushed through over Christmas break when many residence will be away this has been heard
please do not rush this massive change through when there was a much better option originally

o one listening to our concerns

I wish to express my strong 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, I am outraged that the EIS has failed to honestly and fully discuss 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.
- See more at: http://westconnex.info/?p=348660#sthash.6ydfpYlZ.dpuf

The tunnel from Homebush to Haberfield, the first stage of the WestConnex, will simply offload numerous more cars on local streets of our municipality for years to come. A huge volume of traffic will be discharged into Parramatta Road and Dobroyd Parade.
The Environmental Impact Statement assumes that the whole project will go ahead but takes no account of the extra traffic that will come from the northern and southern extensions in the future.
The expense and dislocation of this project could be avoided by spending the money on much better public transport.
I note that at least 85% of the cars driven along roads such as Victoria Road are manned by ONE person. This is ludicrous.

Submission: WestConnex M4 East Environmental Impact Statement (SSI 6307)
I write to express my strong objection to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal.
Global 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.
Over 93% of Western Sydney residents commute by train to the city. They desperately need more expenditure on public transport and commuter car parking near stations rather than a toll road which they could not afford to use.
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 am outraged that the EIS has failed to honestly and fully discuss its social, environmental and economic impacts or to explain why it is prefereable to other, alternative public and active trasport solutions.
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.
* Fails to properly describe the long term impacts of air pollution generated by the increased traffic volumes the project is designed to facilitate.

To whom it may concern,

My child attends Haberfield Public School in year 1 and will be at the school for the next 5 years. it is amazing to me how the State Government ignores the need to keep our children safe from the multitude of toxins which will flow freely from the tunnel pollution outlet just near Haberfield Public School. Do you want the same pollution near your house? I wouldn't think so and neither would anyone else. It is shown by the governments own analysis that the 15 billion or so dollars will not make much of a difference to the traffic flow so why do it? Why not spend the money on public transport?

This project makes no sense on many levels so should be canned.

Metro or Light rail is the way to go.

I do not believe that the project is the answer to the problems it is trying to fix.

Encouraging more people to use public transport and providing fast safe reliable public transport is a better solution than allowing more people to drive into the CBD.

Building elevated or underground roads is the kind of solution which many different countries tried as cities expanded in the 1950's. These schemes are now being replaced or have been replaced by mass transit solutions in those cities.

Schemes like Westconnex have been tried and failed in other cities. Light rail would seem the obvious solution to this problem, as the majority of people commuting along Parramatta road are traveling by themselves in there cars without baggage.

This whole scheme is a poor solution to the problem.

I request action by the State Government and agencies involved in the delivery of WestConnex in relation to:
 Air quality (including monitoring at Haberfield Public School and filtration of the stack)
 Noise and dust (including noise mitigation measures at Haberfield Public School)
 Traffic (including monitoring of traffic levels and rat running, safety measures especially
around the Brescia site which will be a construction zone and parking restrictions for
construction staff near the school)
 Pedestrian/cyclist initiatives and social impact (including more and better pedestrian/cyclists
crossings for Parramatta Road and Wattle St)
 Verification of Building Foundation for my property 33, King Edward Street before and after the tunnel work

I write to express my strong objection to the westconnect m4 east motorway proposal.

Westconnect will increase air pollution and encourage more car use, quickly filling the increase road capacity. It is not a long term solution to Sydney's congestion system.
Also, the fact that the state government has already signed multi billion dollar contracts for westconnect before this EIS was even placed on public exhibition undermines community confidence that this is a genuine consultation process.

This EIS doesn't address the negative impacts along the whole route.

I object to this proposal as it will have devastating impacts on local communities

Dear Sir/ Madam,

We live In Ashfield, and my children attend Haberfield Public School. I am extremely concerned about the following:

- Air Quality:
The unfiltered ventilation stack is located within 400m of our house, and 200m of the school. Filter the ventilation stack. If you can spend $15.4 billion on a road to reduce travel times by just six minutes, you can afford to spend the additional money required to ensure the vast majority of pollution is not released into this densely-populated neighbourhood.

- Pedestrian and Cycleways:
Install additional pedestrian/cyclist crossings between Haberfield and Ashfield as a permanent positive legacy of the Project. We would love to see these be innovative in design - an overpass nearer to Ashfield Park/Orpington St.

- Public Transport:
How is public transport, like light rail, incorporated into the overall plan? Surely this is extremely short sited? We can't simply look to post WW2 car-centric solutions with the projected increase in Sydney's population. Other cities around the world are investing in public transport and reducing the amount of road links.

- Traffic:
We walk each day to school, crossing at the pedestrian crossing which is located directly next to the proposed construction site where Brescia is located. How are we to cross Parramatta Road safely when the only pedestrian bridge that links us to the school is to be closed during the tunnel's construction? The following actions could be implemented:

* For the whole period of the closure of the southern footpath on Parramatta Rd between Chandos and Bland Sts- have lollipop people present at these lights for both the morning & afternoon 'school zone' times.

* For the whole period that the Bland St overpass is unable to be used, have lollipop people be present at the Parramatta Rd/Bland St traffic lights (both to cross Bland from the east and to cross Parramatta Rd) for the morning & afternoon 'school zone' times.

* Install traffic lights at the corner of Alt St and Parramatta Road for at least the construction phase, to provide a crossing away from Bland St where there will be heavy truck
movements. This may also require the installation of traffic lights at Church St/Alt St, as that intersection is already busy and difficult to negotiate because of poor sightlines.

If you could please consider the our concerns it would be appreciated greatly- and it would improve the current design too!



Regards,

Imogene



-

This will not work, the answer is more and improved public transport, pure and simple

The WestConnex project will have significant impact on Haberfield Public School & the surrounding community. stop it please.

I am supporting the submission by the P&C at Haberfield Public School. In particular I
do not believe this is an efficient use of $15.4 billion
of taxpayers' funds, because I do not believe it will lead to the congestion improvements
promoted by the State Government and the WestConnex Delivery Authority (now Sydney Motorway
Corporation).

The Project will have a devastating impact on the Inner West and particularly on our communities of
Ashfield and Haberfield. Ashfield is one of the most densely populated communities in Sydney and
Haberfield has great historical significance, therefore the decision to proceed is all the more
bewildering.

I request the following action:
* Install an air quality monitoring station at the school or very close by well before the M4 East
tunnel begins operation to take baseline measurements of pollution, including PM2.5 and all
emissions for which there are air quality standards.
* Leave the monitoring station operating after the M4 East tunnel opens to monitor emissions
at the school. We request this data be provided frequently to the school and the P&C and
that action is taken immediately if there is a measurable impact on pollution levels.
* Filter the ventilation stack. If you can spend $15.4 billion on a road to reduce travel times by
just six minutes, you can afford to spend the additional money required to ensure the vast
majority of pollution is not released into this densely-populated neighbourhood.
* Consider relocating the stack to a topographically higher point further west along
Parramatta Road where emissions will be released higher into the atmosphere. The stack
should be away from schools, childcare centres and retirement homes so the most
vulnerable members of the community are not exposed to increased levels of pollution.
* Increase the height of the ventilation stack to reduce the impact of emissions on the local
area and increase the likelihood that emissions will be dispersed more widely

Conduct a noise assessment at Haberfield Public School before construction begins and
execute noise mitigation measures. This may take the form of double glazing of windows
(and consequent installation of air conditioning) in classrooms. These mitigation measures
must take place before construction begins. We also request compensation for the
additional electricity costs associated with running the air conditioning because windows
cannot be opened.
3
* Set up a noise monitoring station at Haberfield Public School so levels are monitored during
construction. This data must be made available frequently to the school and the P&C.
* Amend work schedules as required so that students' learning and play is not affected by
noise. This may include regular consultation with the school to ensure noise is reduced
during, for instance, exams, music rehearsals, school assemblies and lunch/recess when
students are outside.
* Immediately reduce noise at the construction sites if the school principal or senior staff
contact authorities to complain of disruption to students and teachers.
* Ensure dust generated by construction activities and vehicle movements is limited and
respond immediately by ceasing construction if notified that children playing outside at
school are affected by dust in the air.

During construction
* For the whole period of the closure of the southern footpath on Parramatta Rd between
Chandos and Bland Sts, have lollipop people in attendance at the Dalhousie St/Ashfield Park
traffic lights to ensure those children who walk to school alone are guided across Parramatta
4
Rd safely. The lollipop people must be present at these lights for both the morning &
afternoon 'school zone' times.
* For the whole period that the Bland St overpass is unable to be used, have lollipop people be
present at the Parramatta Rd/Bland St traffic lights (both to cross Bland from the east and to
cross Parramatta Rd) for the morning & afternoon 'school zone' times.

Install additional pedestrian/cyclist crossings between Haberfield and Ashfield as a
permanent positive legacy of the Project. We would love to see these be innovative in
design - an overpass nearer to Ashfield Park/Orpington St, for instance, that is exciting to
look at as well as useful for our community. The Alt St crossing suggested above could also
remain. For reference, we look at Parramatta Road in Camperdown where there are many
crossings at intersections that are phased well and do not impede traffic, while allowing
locals to cross easily and safely

Yours sincerely