Dear Sir/Madam,

I m writing to express my total objection to the Westconnex.

Sincerely

Laura Villoldo Salvatella

Dear Sir/Madam,

I m writing to express my total objection to the Westconnex.

Sincerely

Victor Perez Landa

The traffic impact into our local area will be horrendous. The local streets can not cope now eg Mitchell rd and Mcvoy st with the current traffic and expanding to 3 lanes will also further impact traffic with an extra 50k cars daily that converge back into one lane. We will also see a loss of car parking in these streets which will impact our local streets and the ability to park. Furthermore the extra traffic poses a risk to our children along with the environmental damage and the loss of part of our park. The proposed traffic from a development in the old toll site will increase traffic furthermore and the changed conditions would make it near impossible for local residents to drive to Sydney park for enjoyment with our families. The smog from the cars will also impact our health further damaging people with respitory conditions. This can not proceed.

I am deeply concerned about the environmental impact and the loss of part of Sydney park. The traffic expansion is also way too much for the area and will push parking into our street and others which is not tenable as it is hard to get a park now. This then poses an extra risk for our children playing in the area. The value of our properties will plummet and I have worked hard to improve the appearance of my property and this will be damaged from the smog.

Please see the attached document outlining my submission regarding the proposed changes to turning conditions on Campbell / Hutchinson St St Peters

The last thing this suburb needs is more traffic! Please redirect funds towards public transport improvements which is the only way to reduce traffic. A freeway directly into a high-density city area is just stupid. Freeways should circle cities, not invade them. I see nothing advantageous about this proposal.

NO CONCERN FOR PEOPLE OR ENVIRONMENT

The EIS lacks rigour and sound analysis, despite the huge volume of documentation. This lack of rigour and analysis is consistent across all chapters and appendices. The project objectives are biased towards a motorway solution, so that any proposed alternative falls short of the proposed solution. Similarly, the work undertaken in the EIS is highly compliance driven, and fails to take into account opportunities or strategic impacts, and the assessment of cumulative impacts is almost negligent.
It is this fear that leads me to think that no matter what genuine concerns the public have about this sham project nothing will be changed. In fact it is highly likely the project will be rushed ahead at a catastrophic level.
There must be some level of government that stands up to what is wrong to protect its citizens and the future of our city and state.

Just so many reasons to object to the westconnex

WESTCONNEX NEEDS AN FULL ENQUIRY
*The WestConnex project comes with no proper and extensive evaluation of alternative options such as world class public transport which was also required by the SEARs. It basically claims its better than doing nothing which is very shallow thinking from a government.
*WestConnex project and the SMC lack any form of public scrutiny. SMC does not have any social license to continue with this project without some open inquiry. There needs to be an NSW Upper House Inquiry and a Federal Auditor General's review due to the lack of transparency and accountability in the business case and numerous irregularities in the planning and EIS processes.

Just so many reasons to object to the westconnex.

HOW CAN THE GOVERNMENT THINK THAT DESTROYING AND POLLUTING OUR ENVIROMENT IS A GOOD THING???
The New M5 and whole westconnex will be a massive contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, while destroying important habitat and greenspace. There is NO safe level of fine particle exposure. Through this project and the entire WestCONnex of which it is part, the NSW Government is consciously building a project that it knows will worsen already high levels of pollution in parts of the inner west and south-west Sydney.
Just many more reasons to object to the westconnex

St Peters Public School P&C Association
Submission to NSW Department of Planning and Environment in response to WestConnex (Sydney Motorway Corporation) EIS for the New M5

1. Timing and deadline of submission

St Peters Public School, including children, staff and parents, will be greatly affected by the proposed WestConnex New M5 works in the St Peters area.

The St Peters Public School P&C (Parents and Citizens) Association does not believe that it has been given sufficient time to respond adequately to the huge Environmental Impact Statement that was released in late 2015 especially as the period includes the school and Christmas/New Year holidays. Many families have been/are absent from the St Peters area and this has made communication difficult. Parents at this time are focused on their children and their families and cannot give their attention to the EIS. Moreover, given the technicalities of many of the issues (air and noise pollution, for example) it is necessary for such major stake holders as the P&C to consult independent experts but many of these, too, are not available during the months of December and January.

The P&C, therefore, requested a number of government authorities, and WestConnex itself, to make requests on our behalf to have the deadline extended. This did not, to our knowledge, occur. The P&C condemns the failure of government and other authorities to assist in the reasonable request for an extension of the deadline especially as it has not been easy to access hard copies of the EIS. One of our members, for example, asked for the hard copy at Marrickville Library but was told it was not available because someone had taken it away. We can only assume that government is not serious about obtaining thoughtful and reasoned responses to the EIS of a very expensive and controversial project, which runs counter to most modern thinking with regard to the construction of infrastructure to produce and ensure livable and sustainable cities.


2. The School and its location with regard to the New M5 and associated works

St Peters Public School is located about 600 metres from the projected opening mouths of the tunnels that emerge at the Alexandria Landfill site and about the same distance from the unfiltered polution stacks. The School is also very close to the proposed works on Campbell St, the streets and roads that feed into Campbell St (Church St, St Peters St, Florence St, Hutchinson St and Brown St), the proposed works at the western end of Campbell St (Unwins Bridge Rd, May St and Bedwin Rd), and the proposed works on the Princes Highway and roads east of the Highway (including Campbell Rd, Crown St, and Albert St).

The P&C has grave concerns that the works themselves, and the operation of the St Peters Interchange once it is completed, will have considerable negative impacts on the health of children and of citizens generally. We will address these concerns in more detail below but we wish to make it clear that it is not just a matter of the School environment itself, but of the environment of the whole suburb since this is where the children reside. A school cannot divorce itself from the environment in which it is located. If a community is damaged, the education of that community's children will also be damaged. One of the major shortcomings of the EIS is the failure to address in any sustained or sophisticated manner the enormous negative repercussions of the WestConnex project (should it proceed) on the St Peter's community including the children who live there or who will be forced to relocate. We will say more about this below, especially when we address the claims made in the EIS with regard to consultation with the School.

In passing, however, we want to put on record that St Peters Public School is, historically, of great importance. The School originally commenced in the 1840s as a parish school of St Peter's Anglican Church and became a public school in 1881. It is one of the oldest continuing primary schools in Australia. Similarly, the suburb itself is of great historical importance. St Peters Anglican Church, for example, is one of the oldest Christian churches in Australia. Similarly, the diversity of architecture in the suburb reveals much about the urbanisation process in Sydney. This is not to suggest that we are opposed to change, but that due consideration must be given to loss as well as to gain. We do not believe the EIS does this.

The plan of our submission generally follows the plan of the EIS itself although we have not had the time to address all the chapters. Lack of input from us to specific chapters does not indicate that we have nothing to say on these issues but that we simply have not had the opportunity to address them.

We want it noted, too, that there is a considerable amount of repetition and spreading of content over the thirty-one chapters of the EIS so that it frequently lacks coherency. This is another reason why the deadline for submissions should have been extended. The EIS is a poorly written and unprofessional document, which appears not even to have been adequately edited to omit a number of errors. It appears to have been put together in considerable haste. The standard of construction, organisation and writing is low, and there are many factual errors such as the incorrect labeling of streets (Campbell St and Campbell Rd for example, are frequently confused and misnamed). These numerous errors in the document give rise to significant concern to stakeholders that other important data and information such as that relating to air quality, noise, and other impacts on human health may not be accurate. Unfortunately, much of this data is presented in a manner that is impossible for lay people to interpret and, in fact, members of the Department of Health and the Sydney Motorway Corporation have acknowledged in a meeting with concerned parent groups that experts who understand much of the air quality data and model employed for the project are not available in Australia. Attempts to extract information and clarify technical and other matters in the documents by contacting the Sydney Motorway Corporation (WestConnex) or Roads and Maritime Services RMS) during the period since the release of the EIS have not, generally, been successful. Our lack of expertise is mirrored by those employed by these bodies to respond to our questions.

Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter does not contain much in the way of facts or other content. We do note, however, that there is no specific mention of the major works slated for Campbell St. There is only a reference to "works to enhance and upgrade local streets and intersections near the St Peters Interchange" (1-2). Given that many homes are going to be demolished, and residents including children (students and potential students of our school and other local schools) are being forced to relocate, this is a misrepresentation. This sort of misrepresentation is typical of the entire document. Alleged positives are emphasised, negatives are ignored or downplayed. Negative impacts become possibles; alleged positives become facts. Note how the claimed `key benefits' of the project on p.1-9 definitely `would include' x and y. There is no mention of any negatives at all.

Chapter 2: Assessment process
We don't have the expertise to comment on this. We do note that WestConnex did misinform the St Peters Public School P&C with regard to the remediation of the old Dial A Dump (Alexandria Landfill) site. We'll say more about this below. But we do have concerns about implementation with regard to environmental and other government policies. It is one thing to have policies, it is another to adhere to them and to be seen to adhere to them.

While, no doubt, the process of the development of the WestConnex project has unfolded according to loose interpretations of government regulations, we do find it unusual and unacceptable that the homes of some of the school community have been acquired before the publication of the EIS and planning approval obtained. Some of the families associated with the School have already had to relocate and most if not all of these have had to withdraw their children from the School because they cannot afford to stay within the area. This applies to renters and to homeowners. The way the project has been revealed to us as a community and as individual households has occurred in an entirely inappropriate order where taxpayer funds are being spent prior to consultation, research, business case presentation, EIS and official approval. We recommend that government look closely at the processes of infrastructural change and make legislative reforms so that the publication of EISs precede negative impacts on communities and on individuals. If a project does not receive approval it is difficult to put Humpty back together again. There seems to be a presumption that approval is assured.

Chapter 3: Strategic context and project need
There are many claims made in this chapter with regard to benefits to be gained from the WestConnex project. These appear to us to be not well substantiated. We note that WestConnex (now known as the Sydney Motorway Corporation) was reluctant to release its full business case, and that it is unwilling to have the whole project audited. There are claims made about the creation of jobs (p.3-19) but nothing about the creation of profits for the enterprises involved in the project. This is another example of this EIS's one-sidedness.

The School community is also concerned that the EIS was produced by AECOM, which has also been contracted to carry out other works on the WestConnex project. This would appear to constitute a conflict of interest and leads us to question the validity of the EIS in terms of both the data and the arguments presented in the document.

We note, too, that the maps (3-1 and 3-2) suggest that the M5 will connect with the M4 even though this ha