Skip to main content

State Significant Infrastructure

Determination

Coffs Harbour Bypass

Coffs Harbour City

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Response to Submissions
  6. Assessment
  7. Recommendation
  8. Determination

An upgrade of approximately 14 kilometres of the Pacific Highway from south of the Englands Road roundabout to the southern end of the Sapphire to Woolgoolga upgrade project. The project would bypass Coffs Harbour.

Attachments & Resources

Early Consultation (1)

Application (1)

EIS (16)

Response to Submissions (4)

Amendments (11)

Determination (3)

Approved Documents

Management Plans and Strategies (41)

Reports (39)

Independent Reviews and Audits (1)

Notifications (1)

Other Documents (11)

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.

Complaints

Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint

Enforcements

There are no enforcements for this project.

Inspections

There are no inspections for this project.

Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.

Submissions

Filters
Showing 61 - 80 of 186 submissions
Name Withheld
Comment
COFFS HARBOUR , New South Wales
Message
As a resident of Coffs Harbour I have some concerns about the Coffs Harbour Bypass Project that I would like to express. My main concern is that the contract for the construction of the bypass should NOT be a "Design and Construct" contract that allows the contractor to make significant changes to the proposed design, including the replacement of tunnels with open cuttings. My concerns about this are two-fold. One of the great attractions for the many tourists visiting the Coffs Coast is the relatively unspoiled nature of the environment. The natural coastal vegetation lining most of the beaches and the view to the west of vegetation-clad mountains coming down toward the sea are significant attractions for visitors. It would be a travesty to spoil the mountain views with gashes in the landscape where cuttings, rather than tunnels, were constructed. There is also a significant native faunal presence in the region (including koalas) that could be significantly compromised by the barrier provided by the bypass if tunnels did not allow easy means of crossing this barrier to their movement. The proposed "faunal structures" are highly unlikely to be effective substitutes for animals used to roaming freely along their preferred routes.
As a resident of the western end of Five Islands Drive only around 500m from the Korora Hill Interchange, my second concern is the increased noise and the large footprint of the proposed interchange. The proposed design for traffic exiting the interchange to enter Coffs Harbour from the north particularly with heavy vehicles changing gears as they slow for the roundabout will increase noise for local residents. The proposed noise wall does not extend to this part of the bypass and I would strongly request that this be re-assessed with a view to extending the noise wall further south to alleviate the increased noise which will be experienced. The footprint of the interchange seems unnecessarily large and a more streamlined design would seem to be preferable.
I appreciate this opportunity to comment on issues that could have a significant negative impact on local residents. I would like to add, however, that the major infrastructure - the Coffs Harbour Bypass - will have enormous benefits for the city.
April Randall
Object
KORORA , New South Wales
Message
I have serious concerns regarding the design, the level of noise, vibration and dust both during and after works are completed and of the loss of ambience of Coachmans Close due to Pacific Highway Upgrades.
Firstly, our home was built in 2013. When we purchased the land in 2012, the pacific highway was a single lane each way, upgrade works that were previously carried out turned this into 4 lanes of highway, further works will increase this to 8. This poses serious health and environmental concerns that have not been addressed by the state government. Health impacts from increased exhaust, dust, and tyre dust include allergy, asthma, cancers, lung disease and congenital defects, so i am asking for an environmental impact statement that includes the health impact for residents that reside next to highways in order to make an informed decision.
Our home is a brick veneer, concrete slab on fill. At present the low vibrations of b-double trucks using brakes and lower gears can be felt in our interior walls, picture frames hung on these walls vibrate. This single fact causes concern as significant works including compaction could potentially disrupt the stability of our home, or cause interior damage to walls, plaster and tiles.
Coachmans Close is a quiet street, with homes of significant value. Very few cars travel past our home during working hours, it is a safe street for children to play in. The barrier wall and foliage that is currently in place creates a secluded and private street feel, by removing these and replacing them with an access road that travels past our homes it decreases the overall feel of the street and potentially decreases the value of the homes that are positioned along this road. As our house was built on cut and fill, privacy has always been an issue for our backyard, at present a fence and foliage is satisfactory to provide the necessary screening to enable us to enjoy our property. However, as the street is much elevated in relation to the yard, further elevation of the access road could mean that we have no chance of screening our property from passers-by. We are concerned that if the noise barrier wall is placed between the Pacific Highway and the access road then a number of houses on this street will have their privacy decreased, noise increased and overall enjoyment of the street decreased. This would be mitigated if a noise barrier wall is placed between Coachmans Close and the new access Road, providing both noise mitigation and privacy.
As stated earlier, increased dust, both during and after works is of concern, most importantly due to health, but also because of greater maintenance costs to our homes.
Finally, good design includes the social impact of residents that reside in close proximity to the highway, not just a statement that studies the town as a whole.
Keith Bensley
Support
SAWTELL , New South Wales
Message
The revised plan for the Coffs Harbour By-pass is a very pleasing demonstration of the planners listening to community opinion and feedback and comprehensively addresses all valid concerns. I trust that the project will be constructed in strict compliance with the exhibited plans with no amendments that will deliver a lesser standard to what has been presented to the community and that the project will now proceed without further delays.
Ian Foskett
Comment
SANDY BEACH , New South Wales
Message
Director – Transport Assessments
Department of Planning
GPO Box 39
Sydney 2001


SUBMISSION COFFS HARBOUR HIGHWAY BYPASS (SS1_7666)

The following is a list of my concerns regarding RMS’s Coffs Harbour Highway Bypass Environmental Impact Statement September 2019.

Noise and traffic:
There are four main issues with noise: The first is how RMS arrived at what houses should be treated and which ones should be left out. As residents, our main concern with the noise study is that many of the noise measurements in the RMS study seem very different from what we as residents actually experience. The second concern is that some of the traffic counts are ridiculous and out of date. The night-time readings for houses away from the existing Pacific Highway seem very high and as we read this, it appears that there is a lot of nighttime noise on local roads which is contrary to what is the norm. This would bump up the noise reading so that the existing level is already high and therefore RMS does not have to treat these houses. The third is that RMS seem to be treating some estates and not others. On page 56 (Volume 4A Appendix G, 4:3:1) of the EIS is a table (table 29) of DA conditions of approval which state what each developer had to do in each estate to treat each house against noise. But each condition of approval is different and how were home owners and developers supposed to know the speed of traffic on the new highway, the type of pavement, the traffic numbers (because these have not been provided and what there is was done years ago) and in some cases, that there was going to be a major interchange near houses? The difference of designing a house that can block out road noise on a local arterial road with traffic speeds at 80kms and very low night traffic is vastly different to that of highway noise at 110kms and a significant amount of trucks during sleep hours. RMS seems to have put all the responsibility on us and Coffs Harbour City Council without providing any information at all. The fourth is that the construction noise levels seem to be very high and there is no proposed treatment of houses for that noise which may go on for years. This appears grossly unfair and at no time were home owners and developers required to treat their houses for that as part of the DA.
Dangerous Goods:
The Pacific Highway upgrade at Coffs Harbour is supposed to remove all heavy vehicles out of the existing Pacific Highway which will then become a local road. The RMS information update (September 2019) that accompanied the EIS, states that the issue of Dangerous Goods has not yet been resolved but the EIS states that a risk assessment has been done. Which is it? How is it possible to put out an EIS and not deal with the serious issue of dangerous goods particularly in such a dense location as the existing highway through our town? At the tunnel in Ewingsdale at the Byron Bay turn off, the signs say that only 1 and 2:1 class of dangerous goods cannot go through. A dangerous goods risk assessment must have been completed for RMS to make any sort of decision in Coffs Harbour. Why has this important information been kept from everyone in Coffs Harbour (including Council)? Coffs Harbour residents want the same rules as applies to the Ewingsdale tunnel, applied to our tunnels, i.e. that all dangerous goods except Class 1 and Class 2.1can use the Coffs Harbour Bypass..
Consultation:
This project is a $1.8billion project and will take years to complete. The consultation with the community by RMS has been woeful. For years they asked us what we wanted and we agreed it was to be tunnels, then without any consultation they came out with a completely different design with no tunnels which we rejected and now we’ve had six weeks with school holidays in the middle of this, to comment on a 3000-page EIS. The display booths RMS have set up are away from where the affected residents are and nobody is going there. Why haven’t RMS come into the different estates and areas of Coffs Harbour to have meetings with the community and talk about these impacts?
Biodiversity:
The Coffs Harbour Bypass route is unique along the Eastern Seaboard because this is where the Great Dividing Range meets the Coast. This is why flora and fauna abounds to make Coffs Harbour a biodiversity hotspot. I’m pleased common sense has prevailed and we now have tunnels, a lower gradeline and quiet open cut asphalt. Please make sure the Bypass is being built that only local native species are used during revegetation activities to ensure th eleast disturbance to our flora a fauna is achieved.

Yours sincerely,
Ian Foskett.
Name Withheld
Comment
KORORA , New South Wales
Message
We would really like to see the sound barrier wall extended further south to the sothern end of James Small Drive.
The highway noise is already quite high, at the current 80km/hr speed, we have major concerns of the noise level once the bypass is complete and a 110km/hr speed.
peter walsh
Comment
KARANGI , New South Wales
Message
Coffs Harbour bypass; SSI_7666)

I have made no political donations in the previous 2 years

I support the proposal for the Coffs Harbour bypass provided it is built as described in the EIS and subject to three issues .

Issue 1.
You have claimed precise baseline measurements of noise at my property (NCA15). However I did not receive any notification of your intention to take these measurements or a request to enter my property. If I had I would have taken a keen interest in the procedure and would have been able to assure others that all was carried out in a professional manner... and for that matter that it was actually done. I request that you carry out the measurements again … this time notifying me so that I may observe and be confident of the procedure.


Issue 2.

Project supported subject to the addition of noise walls on the west side of the bypass from the southern entrance of the Shephards lane tunnel back to the construction area 2C to protect the western residents from noise and visual pollution. You have proposed noise walls on the east side which , without a corresponding wall on the east side, will deflect the noise over to the west side and actually increase the noise of the road substantially .

I note that there is a precedent for the Land and Environment Court ordering the removal of a one sided noise wall because it increased noise on the other side. There are also protections in law to prevent redirection of water and other pollution to neighbours land. I am not proposing the removal but rather the addition of another wall on the west side to contain the noise and visual pollution.

Issue3

You have identified a potential ancillary site (2C) near Shephards lane.
I seek your assurance that you will not lower the height of that hill as it protects the west side from noise and other pollutants.
I also seek your assurance that remediation of that property will be carried out by the planting of native vegetation.
Name Withheld
Support
WOOLGOOLGA , New South Wales
Message
Submission attached
Attachments
Name Withheld
Comment
EMERALD BEACH , New South Wales
Message
I am about to build my families retirement home on corner of Coachmans Close and Fernleigh Avenue.
I have been shown the new access road and underpass plan from West Korora. I have also been shown the Sections and Elevations at our Chainage.
Further to this I was informed that there is no room for a barrier or any planting between Coachmans Close and the new access way/underpass.
Having taken all this on board now (The guys at the Display Centre were very informitive) I wish to submit the following.
I am very concerned about the safety of my family and that of my neighbours should someone pass through the underpass and keep going or run off the access road which will be quite busy now that it will feed from the western side of motorway as well.
The underpass is positioned directly in line with my block which makes it all the more dangerous for us and the headlights will be a nightmare from the west and the north.
Underpass should and can be moved north a few metres to be in line with Fernleigh Crescent.
Our green outlook to the west is being replaced by a view of the service Road, The Underpass and the Motorway which will have a major impact on lifestyle and property values.
With these facts in mind I feel that a safe solid barrier between Access Road / Underpass and Coachmans Close high enough to eliminate car light nuisance and increase the safety of residents. There should also be greenery on the Coachmans Close side of the wall perhaps like in the attached photos.
While being all for the Bypass I feel that my families and my neighbours lifestyle, safety and worth should not and do not have to be so adversely affected.
Thank you
Attachments
William Johnston
Object
SAPPHIRE BEACH , New South Wales
Message
I would like to bring to your attention a section of the pacific highway which runs parallel to coachmans close Sapphire Beach,the northern end of the upgade to the Pacific highway.I am an owner/resident at 3 Coachmans close Sapphire Beach and this section of the upgrade with the retaining noise wall barriers will not benefit or reduce noise where this wall will be situated.There are several properties in the dress circle location that is currently affected with a 5-6 decibell rating.
We as neighbours/residents believe the best outcome in reducing the level of noise is a noise wall barrier running up and over the top of the hill where we all reside,not on ground level, of the current highway as our properties are way above the proposed wall height and will benefit no one in this location.We have been trying to sell our property for 3 years now with no success due to highway noise.Other reasons for a wall is the protection of children from falling over the edge onto the highway.
I would like to take this time to thank you for your considerations and hopefully listen to the people who live here,lets get it right.
Cindy Hoskins
Comment
COFFS HARBOUR , New South Wales
Message
I am providing a written response to this project
Attachments
Garrie Cooper
Comment
COFFS HARBOUR , New South Wales
Message
1) I am concerned about Coramba interchange. The noise level will be Horrendous for those Families living in that vicinity.
2) I am worried about only having a concept design. I want to see a Detailed design and a Construct Only Contract .

3) I am disappointed With the Transparency that RMS have shown to the Coffs Harbour public.

4)Coramba Rd will need to be upgraded.

5) All Dangerous good should go through the Tunnels.
Name Withheld
Comment
COFFS HARBOUR , New South Wales
Message
The Coramba interchange will create additional traffic on the Coramba Rd and West High St leading into the western entrance of Coffs Harbour.
The roads leading into Coffs Harbour from the Coramba interchange should have a load haul tonne restriction of 5tonne or less as these roads can not already handle the large trucks that travel along them as they are not designed to take large trucks or high volume of traffic, these roads are poorly maintained and would not accommodate high number of vehicles entering Coffs Harbour from the west as most people will see this as the easiest and fastest way to enter Coffs Harbour.
Children’s Schools and bus stops in the immediate area will also be affected by the high volume of traffic creating an unsafe area of travel to and from school and bus stops for the children.
The design of the bypass needs to include the improvements to Local Coffs Harbour roads that will be affected by the bypass and not just focus on the Bypass itself as it is the local residents that will be affected for many more years to come.
I hope the Government and RTA listen to the peoples wishes and accommodate them the best way for everyone involved in the project.
Amanda Baston
Comment
BOAMBEE , New South Wales
Message
Zeno and Amanda Baston
P.O.Box 1698
Coffs Harbour 2450
498A Pacific Highway
Boambee NSW 2450
1 October 2018
20th October 2019
Coffs Harbour Bypass Project Manager
RMS
PO Box 546
Grafton NSW 2460

Dear Sir/Madam,

Coffs Harbour Bypass
“Preferred Concept Design”
This is a updated submission for the above proposed project
We are the owners of Lot 2312 on the western side of the Pacific Highway at South Coffs Harbour. Our property is a short distance north of Lindsays Transport depot.
Whilst our property has an area of 9.5 ha, it also accommodates our private residence. It is our intention to continue living on the property for the foreseeable future.
Reference is made to your current exhibition of your preferred concept design.
The following issues are of concern to us.
1) Acquisition of land.
We note that the concept design involves your acquisition of a strip of land along our eastern property boundary, and significant excavation within that strip.
Subject to:
firstly, compensation being paid to us MUST BE IN line with the Just Terms Compensation Act,
This has progressed No further in 12 months NOT ACCEPATBLE
secondly, noise mitigation walls being constructed by you along the revised eastern boundary (of our property), must also be on the western side of proposal
thirdly, the existing utility services adjacent to our boundary being reinstated, and
fourthly, the wearing surface of all of the pavements (within the road reserve) adjacent to our property being asphaltic cement, we have no objection to that acquisition taking place in the coming months.

2) Justification for noise mitigation measures.
We note your projections that traffic volumes in front of our property are likely to increase substantially over the next decade or two. That statistic justifies the requirement for noise mitigation walls and AC pavement along our modified eastern property boundary.

3) Proposed service road between our property boundary and the highway pavement
We note your proposal to construct a northbound service road on the western side of the highway pavement from Lindsay’s transport depot to England’s Road.
In principle, we endorse that concept.
We also note the future requirement for that service road to be upgraded to a two-way pavement to facilitate the highway being upgraded to motorway standard.
We assert that the scope of works for the current bypass project should include the construction of this service road to the “two-way specification”.
We recommend that the southern limit of the two-way pavement should terminate in a cul-de-sac near the southern boundary of the property known as 570 Pacific Highway.

This proposal will involve a minor modification to the design.
The present plan is still for local traffic to feed of and enter the service road of the current north bound highway.
This proposed concept would also encourage excess traffic to utilise the proposed service road as a short cut at speed to enter the England’s rd.
A two-way service road would eliminate the need for large vehicles to use Sawtell Rd over pass when entering Lindsey truck depot traveling south bound.


This proposal will also involve the construction of a physical barrier on the eastern side of the pavement at the southern end of the proposed cul-de-sac to prevent southbound traffic (on the service road) entering the highway pavement.

4) Vehicular access from the service road to Lot 2312
At a point, approximately midway along our eastern boundary, we note that your concept design (of the earth works) is neither in cut nor fill. At that point, we seek your agreement to construct a vehicular access driveway from the service road into our property.

5) as the final plans for the interchanges are not available is extremely disappointing so comment on such important structure Englands rd interchange .
the traffic volumes now and the future 25yrs life span planned will not cope
the present intersection on Sawtell rd. on /off ramp are dangerous and completely inadequate for the volume of traffic at the present date and coming years

6) the access to our property at 498a Pacific Highway is not clearly defined which is not satisfactory to the standards requested
We ask that you incorporate all of the measures referred to above into the final design, and incorporate the associated costs into the current project budget.

Thank you for your consideration.
Yours faithfully,

For and on behalf of Zeno and Amanda Baston
Email : [email protected]
Paul Simpson
Support
SAPPHIRE BEACH , New South Wales
Message
We ( my wife Deirdre Simpson) and myself live at 2 Blackwood Street North Sapphire Beach and when we purchased the vacate lot which is near the Freeway the noise was OK, but since the drought the bush nature strip between the highway and residence housing at North Sapphire Beach has become unbearably loud and the nature strip of trees and shrubs has thinned to allow the noise to come straight into the housing estate and even the houses that where not noise affected when the lots where released for sale and where more expensive, have been affected to the same degree as houses closer to the highway.
We the residence of North Sapphire Beach are requesting, No demanding that NOISE BARRIERS be installed as part of the Coffs Harbour BYPASS in front of all residence homes to give us back our quieter live styles that we moved to Coffs Harbour for.
With the BYPASS going ahead, which is a great thing for Coffs Harbour, Noise entering and exiting Coffs Harbour has not been considered.
Please have a look and Noise Barriers just like all along the highway from Sydney to Brisbane have been put in place, the same needs to done in Coffs Harbour at North Sapphire Beach.
Yours Sincerely
Paul Simpson
0457563834
Name Withheld
Comment
KORORA , New South Wales
Message
please see attached submission.
Attachments
Mackay Family
Comment
COFFS HARBOUR , New South Wales
Message
While our family doesn't object to the Coffs Harbour Bypass as a whole, we do object to the selected route. We believe that there are other routes that would be less detrimental to our family and the community of Coffs Harbour. We make these comments with experience of being active members of the Coffs Harbour community and residents of Mackays road valley for the last 70 years with family history dating back over 100 years.
Attachments
Ian Scott
Support
BOAMBEE EAST , New South Wales
Message
I support the proposed Coffs Harbour Bypass now that guarantees have been given that the bypass will be built using tunnels as originally proposed in the draft plan. While I am not personally impacted by the proposed bypass, I do care about the natural beauty of the terrain surrounding the city centre as this is what makes Coffs Harbour a great place to live. I do have some reservations about some aspects of the project that I consider should be addressed

1 Noise
I have reservations about the accuracy of the RMS noise modelling. I would like to see an independent audit done of the RMS original noise measurements and consequent modelling. Once the bypass is constructed, it will be extremely expensive or impossible to rectify noise issues.
I also question if enough research has been done on the sleep deprivation aspects of overnight noise.

2 Dangerous Goods
If the tunnels are constructed with the latest fire suppression systems that have been employed in other major tunnels, then I believe all dangerous goods vehicles should use the bypass in preference to travelling though the centre of the city. These suppression systems are extremely effective and would extinguish any potential fire very rapidly. I believe it would be safer as these vehicles would be away from residential areas.
At the very least the same class of dangerous goods that are allowed to use the Saint Helene tunnel near Byron Bay should be allowed to use this bypass.

3 Interchanges
The three proposed interchanges at Englands Road, Coramba Road and Korora seem very complex and have a very large footprint. A simpler solution, in my opinion, would be a doughnut design. A very good example is the intersection of Pacific Highway and Oxley Highway at Port Macquarie. This design caters for all possible traffic permutations, handles large traffic volumes and has a small footprint.

4 Construct Only Contract
Although promises have been made that there will be three tunnels constructed, I want to see a Detailed Design before the bypass goes to tender, and a Construct Only Contract so I can have confidence in what’s going to be constructed.
I do not want to see what has happened at Annandale in Sydney with the construction of Westconnex. Local residents were promised an underpass. What was constructed is an ugly overpass.
Liam O'Connor
Object
NORTH BOAMBEE VALLEY , New South Wales
Message
My current family residence at 179 North Boambee Road is highly affected by the proposed Coffs Harbour bypass. We moved houses in 2007 from Sleeman Ave to our current home to enjoy the prospects of privacy, having our own space, and most importantly peace and quiet. However, this is set to be compromised by the introduction of a multi-lane highway no more than 300m from our bedroom windows! Goodbye to the mornings of waking up to birds singing and the wind rustling the trees, and hello to the constant headaches from the reverberation of highway traffic. My father runs a mechanical business from home and my sister and I both study for university degrees, all things that require a relaxed and homely environment, one that a nearby highway is simply not conducive to. The fact that our house sits elevated above North Boambee Road only increases the negative impacts as the highway will be at our eye level.
Not only is the concept of a highway this close to existing residents a clear and numbing sign of the lack of compassion and empathy of planning committees involved, but the inability to provide us local residents with any positive counter-solutions to even slightly out-weigh the negatives only cements this authoritarian status. We are provided with no exit or on ramps to the new highway from North Boambee Road, no sound walls on the western side of the highway to prevent noise pollution namely. I am failing to see any positive solutions and or benefits that the proposed highway can provide for us.
As a 22 year old, I shouldn't be having to worry about the preservation of my childhood home and the long-term negative impacts inflicted on my parents. They should be winding down as they grow older and settle into retirement, not having to battle with the stress of a major bypass being built on their front doorstep! You are preparing to send them down a highway of misery when all they signed up for was peace and quiet when we moved here 12 years ago.
Name Withheld
Comment
COFFS HARBOUR , New South Wales
Message
The break down lanes need to be 3 metres wide . The existing freeways are not wide enough. Quite often you will come across a vehicle broken down but protruding on to the road as the breakdown lane is not wide enough. This a safety issue for road users and emergency service personnel .
The road should have noise wall either side with the top part curved to reflect noise back on to the road.
There should be automated monitoring of noise levels and emission levels with appropriate fines issued.
This is carried out in European and we should follow suit. This is a link to a story regarding the proceeding https://www.businessinsider.com/major-cities-introducing-noise-radars-to-fine-loud-vehicles-2019-9/?r=AU&IR=T
Maxwell Brinsmead
Comment
COFFS HARBOUR , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached document.
Attachments

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSI-7666
EPBC ID Number
2017/8005
Assessment Type
State Significant Infrastructure
Development Type
Road transport facilities
Local Government Areas
Coffs Harbour City
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Minister

Contact Planner

Name
Daniel Gorgioski