THE GOVERNMENT COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT OUR HEALTH
The proposal to operate excavation and construction 24 hours a day so St Peters will have to put up with 5000+ vehicle (2000 heavy vehicle) movements a day for the duration of the project. Exposure of residents including children at St Peters School and the child care centres to diesel fumes day and night when diesel exhaust is classified as a carcinogenic pollutant is an outrage.
This EIS admits that dangerous dust pollution will be created during construction at St Peters. It proposes to water the site to avoid this. The community can not accept this when the proponent itself (via its contractors) has failed to water the site during current asbestos removal, and has also failed to ensure this waste has been watered down at its destination sites in western Sydney. SMC and previously WDA did not respond respectively of properly to residents concerns about illegal removal of asbestos from former dial a dump site. It has been recently revealed that the costs "clear up" of this site has been over budget again costing the tax payer even more money.
Just many more reasons to object to the westconnex

UNFILTERED EMISSIONS STACKS- BAD FOR OUR HEALTH

Plans for unfiltered ventilation stacks, located close to residences and parks which do not meet best international practice. I am aware that there are experts who believe the stacks should be filtered. I do not accept that emissions from stacks are negligible and am as concerned about the impact on residents in South West Sydney as I am in Tempe.

Just many more reasons to object to the westconnex

IRRESPONSIBLE ACTIONS AND ENVIRONMENT DESTRUCTION

Plans to widen Euston Rd to take increases of up to 60,000 vehicles, which will bring this traffic close to windows of homes, destroy 100s of trees and so reduce the capacity of Sydney Park to mitigate the heat, noise and pollution of the massive increase in traffic, reducing the quality of life of the neighbourhood.
Just many more reasons to strongly object to the westconnex

WHAT CARE DOES THE GOVERNMENT SHOW TO PEOPLE WHO WALK???
The failure of the EIS and evidently of the St Peters Interchange design to assess accurately the impact on the pedestrian and cyclist traffic in the streets either side of Campbell St and travelling over Bedwin Rd and the railway bridge, e.g. people with children in strollers or afoot or shopping trolleys walk across the bridge to Edgeware Rd (school and childcare centres, or to the Marrickville Metro shops). Straightening the intersection to enable large vehicles to travel at 60km over the bridge with its narrow footpaths is a frightening prospect

Just another of hundreds of reasons to strongly object to the westconnex

* Tolls - it is expected tolls will be introduced on currently free to use roads. This will have an impact on local residents as no doubt, previously quiet residential streets will become corridors for traffic wanting to avoid paying a toll.
* Statistics (City of Sydney website) show that 90% of Western Sydney workers commute to the city on public transport. WestConnex will not cater to these needs.
* Public transport - Sydney's current public transport is not adequate and fails to meet the demands of a growing city. Public transport is already overcrowded. The money proposed for WestConnex is much better funded towards public transport.
* Pollution - predicted increase of cars on the road means an increase in pollution from cars. Supporting public transport is a greener and better for the environment.
* Even more pollution - ventilation stacks in Sydney Park will emit pollution, ruining the park for everyone.
* Loss of trees - only further adds to pollution as you are removing a sparse resource in a condensed city area. Trees help clean the air.
* Loss of the local park in St Peters - I frequently use this park as a local resident. It is extremely upsetting to see the loss of this park and its old trees.
* Property devaluation - residents' properties may be decreased due to increased traffic from motorists attempting to avoid tolls and the WestConnex itself (I would not want to live on a busy street, near lots of pollution and noisey roads and most property buyers I imagine others are similar).
* Critical linking roads appear to be unfunded, wont WestConnex simply put additional pressure on these roads, such as King Street, Newtown?
* WestConnex will funnel additional traffic into my local area of St Peters, Erskineville, Alexandria and Newtown. As a resident of this area, this is extremely concerning.
* Sydney Park - the gorgeous and much used Sydney park is an oasis for residents and visitors. WestConnex will isolate Sydney Park with fast moving traffic, tunnel portals and ventilation stacks (what an eyesore).

ANOTHER EIS FAILURE
The failure of the flood and water quality assessment to consider localised flooding from heavy rain down Lackey and Hutchinson Streets into Campbell St despite evidence of more severe rainstorm events as a consequence of climate change. The elevation of Campbell St and the new median strip's effect on local flash flooding in Campbell St is not mentioned.
Monies paid to companies where there is a conflict of interest (i.e the same interest should not have occurred) Shame no one in government is standing up to this huge integrity issue.

Just another of 18 billion reasons to object to the westconnex

Objection to the fools creating this disaster

BLURRING THE LINES
The failure to provide detailed plans so residents can see and assess what are the real, proposed changes to Campbell Road and St, intersections with Burrows Rd, with the Princes Highway, with Church, St Peters, Hutchinson and May Streets and Unwins Bridge Road and environs. This is a dereliction of the statutory duty of providing an accurate Environmental Impact Assessment. I reject this form of broad brush planning in which companies are given contracts and then request approval before any detailed design to inform the community on the actual nature of impacts is completed.
Just another of hundreds of reasons to object to the westconnex

I strongly object to the proposed New M5.

The roads around the St Peters interchange are already at an unacceptable Level of Service and are getting worse because of in-fill developments not allowed for by the EIS:
* Green Square: 61,000 residents
* Ashmore: 6,000 residents
* Waterloo Estate: 30,000 residents
* Central 2 Eveleigh: 56,000 residents, 25,000 workers

With an extra 150,000 people in an area of a few square kilometres, this is going to be the most densely populated area in Australia.

There is no evidence that the traffic models have factored in this huge increase in density that will occur in the area.

The EIS clearly demonstrates that the traffic on roads in the Alexandria area will deteriorate as a result of WestConnex. But it also predicts that Level of Service will improve at many intersections even if nothing is done - in the case of Euston Rd/Sydney Park Rd, from D to A, in the PM peak. This is clearly wrong - so wrong that it suggests that the traffic modelling is broken (the EIS does acknowledge that "modelling is probably optimistic") and it suggests that the level of service on local roads will be several levels worse than predicted, either with or without the project.

According to the business case, Euston Road is supposed to handle 61,000 cars on 3 lanes each way. This is almost 10 times what it can handle on 2 lanes. There is no way it can handle 61,000 cars, however many lanes are added to it. Adding extra lanes to Euston will not help because the roads that Euston Road feeds are also gridlocked. Traffic does not simply dissipate once it leaves the M5. It will only increase the damage done to the area and cause rat-running.

Meanwhile, usage of the M5 is not growing, and has not grown for some years. This project only makes an existing road more expensive for commuters. It will save little time, if any, and at an exorbitant price. As the EIS acknowledges, the tolls are going to force drivers off the M5 and onto local roads, and no wonder. The Updated Strategic Business Case shows that for almost all of its users, the Value of Time saved is less than the cost of using WestConnex.

This project will carve 11,000 square metres from Sydney Park and expose the rest of the park to vehicle fumes and noise. This damage is particularly felt, because this area already has one the lowest amounts of public open space per person in Australia, even without considering the future in-fill projects that are already in progress.

Alexandria residents are already exposed to levels of PM2.5 particles that exceed national guidelines, yet the EIS predicts that these levels will only worsen.

The new M5 is an unfair waste of taxpayers' money that could be better used elsewhere, such as on projects that improve transport infrastructure out west or in the regions, or in our area to help us cope with the massive rise in density that we are facing over the next ten years.

Finally, I strongly object to the quality of the EIS. There is too little information on the traffic volumes that will occur in Alexandria, and there is also conflicting information on possible mitigation strategies. Although the diagrams in the EIS show right-hand turn lanes in all four directions at the Sydney Park Road/Euston Road intersection, the text of "New M5 EIS Vol 2B App G Traffic and Transport" instead indicates that there will be a "banned right turn from Mitchell Road into Sydney Park Road [because of] the banned right turn southbound at the Sydney Park Road / Euston Road intersection". The text also indicates that there will be a "north-bound lane [which] will go as far as Maddox Street, where it becomes a new left-hand turn lane", but the diagrams do not show this. Not having clarity on which of these two scenarios is planned makes informed consultation impossible. If these right-hand turns into Sydney Park Road are not permitted, there will be enormous volumes of traffic on local roads as drivers try to rat run. Likewise, the extra left-hand turn lane, if it is actually planned, seems destined to drive traffic onto local roads.

Roads, especially tunnels, are expensive, and move relatively few people - perhaps 2,000 vehicles per hour per lane. This is a fraction of what can be moved by heavy rail, or light rail, or bicycles. Even pedestrians can move more commuters per lane than can be moved by car.

The EIS business case says that with toll roads, "losses to investors [are typical] due to traffic demand forecast being overly optimistic. This has led to a situation where it is likely the private sector sponsors will be unwilling [and the NSW Government is likely to have] to take on all or part of the development and start up traffic risk". Why does the NSW government think that WestConnex can be profitable when the private sector does not?

I call for the M5 EIS not to proceed. As a NSW taxpayer, I want better value for money.

NO CARE FOR THE AFFECTED
The psychological and social distress and monetary loss caused by the forced acquisition of dozens of homes and business premises in St Peters, which will break up communities established for decades. There is no assessment of this in the Social and Economic Impact study and barely any mention in the health impact study.

Just another of hundreds of reasons to object to the westconnex