Angela D'Amore, MP for Drummoyne

See RTA's full M4 East Options Study document here

RTA says	REALITY, IMPACT & OUTCOMES

Enhance the main road network between western Sydney and the central business district (CBD), Sydney Airport, Port Botany and the South Sydney Growth Centre	Contradictory - have to channel into and through city to then go out again. If Port Botany is target, means massive increase in B-doubles etc. Does not apply to Parramatta Rd. Still has bootlenecks at Battle Bridge and Taverners Hill etc. 'Enhance' is unwise word for City West route that narrows at Dobroyd Pt, and narrows to ONE LANE on ramp to Anzac Bridge, and still includes 8 sets of traffic lights.
	Note there is no definition of WHAT kind of vehicles will benefit, or where FROM.

Connects to City Tunnel	How ?? And if done DIRECTLY via long tunnel option would be a good idea. But NONE of the options shows any way to achieve it.


Reduces congestion along Parramatta Rd	Wrong, wrong, wrong. Feeds four extra lanes into Parramatta Rd for 4 blocks - less than 1km, and then reverts to same bottleneck as now at Sloane St Only with MORE traffic, so worse. Only result - you reach a bigger gridlock faster. TUNNEL FUNNEL effect. RTA gives no indication of actual increased numbers - M4 is currently 90,000 vehicles per day and at Ashfield Park it is 75,000 vpd. Does this become 115,000 vpd? Where do they physically go? Key is Battle Bridge at 5 lanes max and can't widen. Parramatta Rd MUST narrow from proposed 10 lanes to half this. Downsizing lanes into fewer streams is one of biggest causes of bottlenecks known - see Sloane St any morning right now.
	The only place on Parramatta Rd where the plan will reduce congestion is at the Concord Rd cloverleaf - and then only in part, because Canada Bay residents will still have to use it because they have NO new access to the M4, and none at all to the East extension.

Provide a high standard direct linkbetween M4 Motorway and City West Link.	New exit to City West is just two lanes - one in each direction. RTA contradicts itself later by saying aim is to divert traffic from City West onto PπRd (with no comment on consequences as noted above !) City West Link Rd is currently at overcapacity - estimated at close to 80,000 vehicles per day. Note the vpd coyly given as in 'Leichhardt' is irrelevant, if not a lie. Real vpd was over 52,000 in mid-2000 - has increased dramatically since then. At 7.30am on any weekday, traffic is ALREADY queued back to Mortley and Waratah St lights.
	TUNNEL FUNNEL effect here too. Like Battle Bridge, there are physical limits not even the RTA can change - the City West MUST narrow to max four lanes at the Rowing Club. The only way around this is to dynamite Dobroyd Pt itself, because RTA can't go out over water. As well - the new Hawthorne Canal Bridge is fixed at two lanes either way, and there are STILL 8 traffic lights to the city - each one a constipation-point.
	Feeding in more cars gains less than 1/2km and means a bigger gridlock, faster.
Improves urban amenity along Parramatta Rd	A furphy. Along the whole length of Parramatta Rd from Strathfield to Ashfield Park there are very few apartment or flat buildings as such - mostly mixed commercial/residential and (except for a few in non-tunnel zones on North Ashfield or at Dalhousie St , thus ADVERSELY affected) all near the cloverleaf off Concord Rd. So WHAT 'urban amenity' does RTA intend for caryards and McDonalds etc.?


Improves bus routes along Parramatta Rd.	Another furphy. There may be lots of buses going to the Burwood Depot, but only ONE actual bus route along the affected part of Parramatta Rd, and it is a very low key operation, with max 3 runs per hr. Most City-Parramatta Rd bus routes turn off at or before Liverpool Rd .
Improves north-south bus routes crossing Parramatta Rd. and improves bus links to encourage road-based public transport	Wrong - makes no difference. Only routes affected are across Concord Rd (stays same) Burwood Rd (stays same) and Frederick St (impact unknown, but may be adverse not improved). The extra traffic on Dalhousie St will make bus access worse, and ditto the Sloane St snarl for Liverpool Rd routes. The ONLY other direct N-S crossing is Bland St - which is to be CLOSED. If claimed 'improvements' are to be by way of 'B-lanes' at cross-point lights, these can be done whether there's a tunnel or not


Will reduce delays for commercial traffic in the area	No explanation offered. There will be major delays in the tunnels anyway, and their exits feed out into gridlock situations. Either this, or capacity of tunnel will need to be counted/limited to comply with laws prohibiting more than 15min vehicle delay in enclosed space. Such limitation will be counter-productive and NOT ideal for PPP developers. Note also, much of the commercial traffic is focused on FLEMINGTON MARKETS - and in this area there is NO access to the extension anyway - they can't get onto it to go TO the city. and they can't get OFF it in the vicinity either, until Silverwater Rd All this traffic will still have to use Parramatta Rd. Ditto for access to Homebush Waste Facility


Ventilation Stacks near the portals: Option 1.	In residential locations, 2 in one suburb, and within 1/2km of each other. Located next to densest urban area in Australia - North Ashfield. No adequate filtration system in used or planned. Prevailing winds mean health and pollution disaster. Compounds aircraft noise/pollution problems.


TOLLS	Expect these to be at least $2.20, and more likely $3.30 for M4 East section, with NO resident rebate. Very expensive way to save few minutes, when all leads into even worse traffic jam at Dobroyd Pt and Battle Bridge. Many people will avoid paying two tolls - query logic of car numbers/usage. CRASH costings are far more realistic


ANZAC BRIDGE ≠ no mention of Victoria Rd	RTA Long Tunnel OPTION 2 misrepresents CRASH proposal. There is NO need for a Parramatta Rd exit, and EVERY REASON to go right through to the available currently disused railway yards and then UNDER Victoria Rd for separate access to Anzac Bridge - thereby solving that problem as well. Only an OSTRICH would ignore this - especially when the COSTINGS ADD UP AS WELL.

IN CONCLUSION	The RTA Report is a contradictory, with flawed data and a lack of logic even on such basic considerations as vehicle movement efficiencies. Few traffic counts are given, and one (for the City West) is irrelevant for consideration of the Haberfield portal. No financial basis is given that would allow realistic cost comparisons between options, or for assessment of tolls and/or cost-effectiveness.

	By any measure, this is a project that will have major impacts and as things stand there is simply NOT ENOUGH DETAIL for people to consider, let alone decide. There is an URGENT NEED TO DELAY THE DEADLINE FOR RESPONSE - given announcement was just pre-Xmas, and many people are away for holidays until school return in Feb, March 1 is simply not enough time for affected communities to go behind the wishful thinking in the RTA document. Another reason for delaying deadline is fact that ONE MONTH AGO the Minister promised there would be detailed maps, information and leaflets in letterboxes in 'early January' So far - nothing. February is a short month. If deliveries will not even start until after 19 January, some residents will receive nothing until the Australia Day holiday or later - giving them barely 4 weeks to respond.
	The Haberfield Association suggests at least one month's delay, until Friday 2 April .