Submission to WestConnex New M5 EIS, project number SSI 14_6788

Submitted on behalf of the all the residents of 2-32 Campbell Road Alexandria.

Construction compounds C14, C9 - impacts to local residents during construction phases. Impact rating to residents is listed as high during the construction phase

Impacts as outlined by the EIS document appendix K to heritage listed items located within the LCZ zoned R1 General Residential 2 - 32 Campbell Road. The area is currently characterised by suburban quiet street that are only intersected by busier transport corridors.

Proposed mitigation to construction compound impacts
During construction the compound C9 and C14 will be comprised of a complete work site with numerous outbuildings etc. The site will be cordoned off from the residential terraces 2-32 with only a chain link fence and temporary noise barriers. Proposed alternative- Solid noise barriers higher than the proposed 2.5 metres and no lighting along the boundary of the compound facing the Campbell road residences 2-32 to minimize both noise and light pollution during the construction phases.

C14 - to be moved 20 meters up towards Barewon Prk road and away from the terraces as it is currently situated next to number 2 impacting the privacy and amenity of terraces 2 - 12.
C9 - to be moved 50 meters away from the current Campbell Road alignment and it's current proposed position in the EIS plans. This would reduce the visual impact, noise impact and light impact of this construction zone. Coupled with a move from temporary to permanent noise barriers and solid fencing, other than a chain link to reduce light pollution.

The EIS assumes that Compound C9 nd C14 will be minimally lit at night - we require a detailed lighting management plan to be released to the residents for comment prior to any lighting being installed see table 6.18 Appendix K night lighting Impact assessment of Campbell Road Construction Compound C9. If the lighting impacts are greater than `minimal' we require on-premises mitigation for each terrace to minimize the light impact eg Block out shutters if required for each premises from 2 - 32.

To the Director, Major Planning Assessments, Department of Planning

I write to express my strong objection to the WestConnex New M5 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 because:

1) The New M5 will have devastating impacts on our local communities and local amenities.
2) The New M5 will be a massive contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, while destroying important habitat and greenspace.
3) WestConnex and the New M5 is a financial black hole that won't solve Sydney's traffic congestion.
4) The WestConnex project including the New M5 lacks transparency and accountability.
5) The WestConnex project comes with no real evaluation of alternative options such as world class public transport.

I agree that I have not donated more than $1000 to any political party, elected member, group or candidate within this financial year.
I agree to the NSW Planning Department publishing my submission on their website, including any personal details it contains.

I wish to oppose WestJConnex because of the breaking up of communities, the degrading of the environment, air quality and the amount of traffic on a poorly planned route. This project reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons where they built an escalator to nowhere. This sums up WestConnex and the plan to build it but not to think about where it's going to come out. Sydney Park will be impacted particularly badly. After all the wonderful development the City of Sydney has done within the park to make it truly a peoples' park, you are taking part of it for WestConnex. The money should be spent on public transport. If WestConnex goes ahead it will ruin the inner city for the people who live here.

I OBJECT TO THE WESTCONNEX

SUBMISSION TO M5 EIS

Name: Beth Aitken
Full address: 56 Hart Street, Tempe, NSW

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.

ADD YOUR OWN COMMENTS HERE:

It is also a disgrace that the EIS was dropped just prior to Christmas with submissions due only a month later. This does not give the community sufficient time to become fully informed on the complete impact that the Westconnex will have on residents in surrounding suburbs.

Funnelling more traffic from the west into the CBD is a completely ridiculous idea. As they currently stand the M roads are funnelling more traffic into the inner city than it has capacity for. It is true the Westconnex may save drivers 5 minutes to get to the outskirts of the city, but what then? Sydney's small suburban streets are expected to bear the increased traffic flow turning the local villages in the City of Sydney council into major thoroughfares. The great work that these communities have done in the past few years will be spoiled. The quality of life that residents have come to know will be destroyed along with the property values in the area. Increased emissions will have long term effects on community health and parking will become even more of a nightmare than it already is.

The Westconnex is ill conceived. We should be going back to the drawing board on this issue and thoroughly thinking through the issues. We should be using these tax payers funds to build a world class public transport system that reduces the traffic coming into the city rather than pushing bottlenecks further towards the CBD.

I have not made a reportable political donation. (Circle the option that applies to you. If yes, you need to attach a Political Disclosures Donation Statement, available from the Department of Planning website).

I live in Newtown, and as an inner city resident, I deplore infrastructure developments that ignore public transport. As cities worldwide have discovered, building more roads invites more drivers which quickly leads to more congestion. Places like Tokyo and NYC no longer widen/add highways, but instead improve public transport. Its the only way to develop a better future, and it's hard to fathom how a progressive city such as Sydney is choosing the other direction, toward more gridlock, neighborhood disruptions and increased pollution.

I am against the WestConnex St Peters interchange.

Currently, St Peters, and the surrounding areas of Alexandria, Erskineville, Newtown and more, are eclectic, peaceful areas, good for families and young professionals alike.

The introduction of the interchange, and therefore an increase of traffic, will be detrimental to the area.

The number increase of vehicles on already congested roads will be catastrophic. Noise and air pollution will inevitably rise. The great work with the redevelopment of Sydney Park will be all for naught with the introduction of the new roads. Drivers will potentially use back streets to avoid the interchange charge, increasing risk for other road users and pedestrians.

The money intended for the interchange would be better spent on public transport or providing viable alternatives for people to commute to work (more bicycle lanes, car share initiatives).

The proposed interchange would not only be a disaster for the area but the whole city.

I object that this project is trying to continue in the face of serious criticism by the State and Federal Audit offices.

I object that this project is trying to continue when its own business case admits that it doesn't stack up economically or operationally.

I object that this project is trying to continue when the evidence shows it will cause deterioration in the health of citizens.

I object to the 20 metre high unflitered ventilation stacks at St Peters.
I object to the disregard paid by the proponents to the health of the community in inner Sydney where particulants in the air are already beyond recommended levels. The Government is breaching a fundamental obligation to the community if it knowingly allows this health deterioration to occur. It will be liable.

Similarly, I object that noise levels on both sides of Euston and McEvoy streets will be in the highest decibel band contemplated by the EIS both day and night.

Residents and the community are seriously concerned with the validity and environmental affects of thi project. Below are the following reasons:
- Air quality will be compromised in the area as the road will attract more vehicles and pollution;
- Exhaust stacks to be filtered and regularly maintained to preserve air quality and not risk the health of people and surrounding environment;
- Monitoring stations located NEAR the road, NOT 0.5km away in open space with an abundance of mature trees (Current air quality monitoring station located in Beverly Hill Park);
- Remnant forest between Canterbury Golf Course and existing M5 protected and heritage listed due to its significance;
- Open Space to be preserved;
- More cycleways required;
- More stringent noise barriers required;

This multi billion dollar project is short sighted and the EIS is filled with faults.

It deeply concerns me the effects that the St Peters interchange will have on St Peters, Newtown, Erskineville and Alexandria where absolutely no planning for the flow on effect has been planned.

These suburbs in their current state are already choking and with the State government planning to bring another 60-100,000 people into the area through housing developments there is absolutely no place for such poor planning.

I ask your department to seriously look at my submission and to open a full inquiry into WestConnex at St Peters.

Kind regards

Nicholas Luhman