5.0 Objection to the corruption of planning process
WAG objects the corruption of proper planning processes that characterises WestConnex, including the New M5.
Read more6.0 Objection to the health impacts
WAG objects to the negative impact the WestConnex project, including the New M5, would have on the health of residents who live, work or study along the motorway’s path, as well as drivers who use the tunnels and feeder roads.
Read more7.0 Objection to the impact on air quality and EIS assessment of impact
WAG objects to both the impact WestConnex, including the New M5, will have on Sydney’s air quality, and the failure of this EIS to properly assess those impacts.
Read more8.0 Objection to the impact of WestConnex, including the New M5, on climate change
WAG objects to the increase in emissions WestConnex, including the New M5, will cause, and the worsening of climate change that will result. WAG fundamentally rejects the proponents’ allegation that WestConnex will improve air quality and reduce emissions.
Read more9.0 Objection to the impact of noise and vibration caused by WestConnex, and failure of the EIS to properly analyse these impacts
WAG objects to the both the long and short-term impact that increases in noise and vibration will have on the lives of the hundreds of thousands of people who currently live, work or study in or near the route of the planned WestConnex, including the New M5. We also object to the poor analysis of these impacts in the New M5 EIS.
Read more13.0 Objection to biodiversity impacts and failure of the EIS to properly assess these impacts
WAG objects to large-scale negative impact that WestConnex, including the New M5, will have on biodiversity, and the failure of this EIS to properly consider those impacts.
Read more14.0 Objection to the destruction of Sydney’s heritage
WAG objects to large-scale destruction of heritage areas and buildings cited in the New M5 EIS that WestConnex, including the New M5, will cause. Given the disastrous heritage impacts of the proposed M4 East on Haberfield, the heritage aspects of this project have been to some extent overlooked.
Read more15.0 Objection to Alexandria Landfill impacts and the failure of the EIS to properly assess these impacts
WAG consulted with an environmental scientist with professional experience in the regulation of NSW landfills to prepare this part of our submission and have identified a large number of serious issues with the proposed remediation of the Alexandria Landfill site, the planned construction of the St Peters Interchange on this site, and AECOM’s assessment of it:
Read more16.0 Objection to local impacts not covered in other sections
Kingsgrove Beverly Hills
The impacts on Kingsgrove and Beverly Hills are of grave concern to WAG. Attacks by the government on the WAG group are designed to hide from the residents of South West Sydney the impacts on their communities. We are concerned, for example, about the residents of Stoney Creek Road who have never been properly consulted or informed about the increase traffic and pollution, they will face as a result of the New M5. Details of information about increased traffic should have been explicitly communicated to them in a range of appropriate community languages.
Read moreNew M5 submission
WAG New M5 submission: Introduction and cover letter
Posted by · February 14, 2016 4:36 PM
1.0 Objection to the failure of WestConnex, including the New M5, to achieve its stated core objectives
Posted by · February 14, 2016 4:33 PM
2.0 Objection to the lack of transparency and proper process
Posted by · February 14, 2016 4:15 PM