I am strongly opposed to Westconnex. Spending $15.4 billion in state taxpayer funds for a saving of 6 minutes in travel time (which will proportionally decrease as traffic increases) is irresponsible and wasteful. Particularly when carbon-induced climate change has been identified as the greatest challenge of our time, we should be moving away from roads to more equitable, efficient, sustainable transport solutions. This spending should go into improving public transport infrastructure, not roads for individual motorists.

I am deeply concerned that contracts were signed before the release of the business case to the public, and before planning approval. This is the reverse of standard process, and the lack of transparency around these commitments suggests that vested interests, not community interests, are being served. It deeply undermines my trust in the current State Liberal Government, and by extension also the Federal Liberal Government.

I am also deeply concerned that the project is being pushed ahead despite concerns about its viability expressed by the NSW Auditor General.

Further aspects that are highly problematic are:
1) There are no plans to diffuse traffic where the City West Link comes out at Ashfield/Haberfield, and increasing traffic flow from Western Sydney to this area will only serve to intensify already poor traffic flow and conditions.
2) The potential flow-off effect onto local roads from the tollway during congested periods.
3) There are currently no plans to filter the smoke stacks, which are located near residential areas and schools. Smoke stacks must be filtered.
4) The noise and vibrations generated from 24/7 truck access to and from construction areas during construction periods will impede quality of life and devalue properties of local residents. These hours should be restricted.
5) Encouraging greater use of fossil-fuel-reliant motor vehicles is irresponsible as it will encourage greater use of fossil fuels at a time when we should be making efforts to reduce fossil fuel use to combat climate change.
6) There needs to be a feasibility study around the likelihood of Western Sydney residents paying a toll to access the road. As an example, the Cross-City Tunnel is an expensive yet under-utilised piece of infrastructure, and tolls are being raised to cover costs that are not being met due to lower-than-projected use. Will motorists be willing to pay tolls to use the road? Given that Western Sydney is home to some of Sydney's lower socioeconomic tiers, the likelihood that motorists will continue using the surface road and avoid tolls is conceivably high. The business case should be released.
7) Crossing Parramatta Rd between Ashfield and Haberfield will become difficult, hampering access to amenities for locals.
8) Destruction of the Haberfield heritage area.

Please consider these concerns. I look forward to seeing them address in the response to submissions. Thank you.

I would like to lodge an objection to the West Connex project as a whole. The bloody minded lack of vision and planning for the future of our wonderful city is astonishing. It is clear that the billions of dollars spent on delivering more motor vehicles into a city centre that has in large part, banned cars, is stupid. Sydney will be a laughing stock in a world where walkable cities and urban centres are mushrooming in keeping with the growth of knowledge economies. The absence of a business case before the exhibition of the project is at best, negligent. It is clear that a properly constructed financial analysis would never endorse this backward looking folly.

I object to the WestConnex M4 East proposal as it encourages more use of private cars so it bad for air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, pollution of waterways and ultimately our health.
This proposal is also bad for our community. Suburbs will be divided and many areas lost. let's fix public transport instead of taking steps backwards.
Regards
.Ursula Buchan

I object to the WestConnex M4 East proposal as it encourages more use of private cars so it bad for air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, pollution of waterways and ultimately our health.
This proposal is also bad for our community. Suburbs will be divided and many areas lost. let's fix public transport instead of taking steps backwards.
Regards
.Ursula Buchan

I object to the WestConnex M4 East proposal as it encourages more use of private cars so it bad for air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, pollution of waterways and ultimately our health.
This proposal is also bad for our community. Suburbs will be divided and many areas lost. let's fix public transport instead of taking steps backwards.
Regards
.Ursula Buchan

I object to the WestConnex M4 East motorway proposal as I believe it will encourage more cars, therefore we worse for the environment and worse for our health; it will divide communities & destroy neighbourhoods and there has not been adequate transparency or regard for community sentiment.
Thank you for your consideration of my concerns.
Regards

Fiona Steele

Submission: WestConnex M4 East Environmental Impact Statement (SSI 6307)

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.

I object to this proposal as it encourages more cars instead of public transport and bicycle paths, and fails to provide a long term solution to traffic and congestion.

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 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.Zq5leCXw.dpuf

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.