Great Western Highway Blackheath to Little Hartley

The air outlets at Evans Lookout should be moved so they are not close to the existing homes . I live nearby and do not want to breathe in the polluted air nor see the huge ugly stacks

This submission is on behalf of the Medlow Bath Residents Association. Medlow Bath will be dissected by a duplicated surface road through our small village, as part of the Great Western Highway Duplication. We care deeply about the area in which we live and work for the betterment of our community. The current EIS must be extended to cover the full project from Katoomba to Lithgow.
Thank you for he opportunity to comment.
Debra Brown
President

I believe the tunnels will not provide any benefit to the communities that it is proposed to serve. There will be more chance of an accident in the tunnels - if it involves dangerous goods, there is a chance of a fatality

I do not want my personal details to be made public

Application Name: Great Western Highway, Blackheath to Little Hartley Tunnel EIS

Application Number: SSI-22004371


Dear Madam/Sir,

I object to the proposal.

My main reason for lodging this submission and objecting to this proposal is that I am particularly concerned about the impacts the proposed tunnel and it’s construction might have on the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. These must be minimised in every instance. The Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area is a significant site of international value and a matter of national environmental significance in which all interventions must be thoroughly examined and addressed.

There is a significant risk that the tunnel’s construction could also negatively impact aquifers supplying groundwater to groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and their dependent species, along both sides of the proposed tunnel corridor, including within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Changes to water flow because of construction are expected. The continued health of the aquifers is very important.

I am also concerned by the threat of reduced groundwater to the Commonwealth-listed Peat Swamps that align the corridor and the populations of endangered Giant Dragonfly and Blue Mountains Water Skink, both groundwater dependent species that have been recorded in the swamps between Medlow Bath and Mt Victoria. Australia already suffers from the highest level of wildlife extinctions in the world. Disrupting critical habitat for these species only increases the rate and speed of extinction.

A further concern remains for the health of the surface water, in particular Greaves Creek which could be damaged by the tunnelling processes.

Despite this EIS being released, I call on the federal government for a full EIS across the entire Great Western Highway project upgrade to ensure that matters of national environmental significance are addressed. The current piecemeal approach, dividing the upgrade into sections for review, is totally inadequate as it will not provide a true understanding of the cumulative impact and long-term consequences for the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

For the only planet we have.

I have no reportable political donations (including donations of $1000 or more) made within the previous two years to declare.

I support the project subject to certain conditions being met. Please refer to my attached letter.

I think the environmental impact this will have on our bushland will be irreversible, the impact to home value close to this will impact home owners including their wellbeing.
Please consider this in your final review.

I would like to make the following comments about the Great Western Highway Upgrade – Blackheath to Little Hartley Environmental Impact Statement.

- World Heritage Area. Some parts of the report state that the project will cause no direct impact on the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and that any negative impacts will be indirect because the project is located outside the GBMWHA. However, the NSW SEED Map Viewer and UNESCO World Heritage Convention map suggest that the GBMWHA boundary is consistent with the Blue Mountains National Park boundary north-west and immediately adjacent to the project. It would be helpful to explain these differences.

- Declared Wilderness Area. The report appears to omit assessment of the project on the nearby Declared Wilderness Area. This area is located approximately 900 metres north-west of the project.

- Geological Diversity. The report appears to give less emphasis to geological than biological diversity. Tunnelling would remove large volumes of natural rock that unlike biological environments would restore much more slowly (millions of years) after and if the infrastructure were to be removed. These impacts are more irreversible and should arguably be given greater importance. Irreversible actions would appear to restrict future nature conservation initiatives caused by or independent to the project.

- Environmental Impact Assessment Method. Several parts of the report appear to assess environmental impacts in overall and average terms. For example, an argument is given that the land area affected by the project represents a small fraction of the total GBMWHA land area. However, this assessment method opposes a view that could be held that all equally protected area is protected equally regardless of its area.

- Offsetting of Impacts. Some parts of the report state that negative environmental impacts will be offset by conservation and protection of other areas. Considering that all parts of nature are unique, it would seem difficult to identify and protect an area that provides identical environmental values than those affected by the project. It would be helpful to describe the areas proposed for offsetting of those negatively affected by the project.

- Cumulative Effects of the Project and Other Projects. The report appears to include relatively little assessment of the cumulative effect of this project and other activities on the surrounding natural environment and protected areas. Many of these projects are proposed in short succession. Such projects could include: Western Sydney Airport, Warragamba Dam Wall Raising, Gardens of Stone SCA Ecotourism, and nearby mining operations.

- Traffic Volumes and Mobility. The report could be clearer about the the traffic analysis basis. It would seem that the project will cause increased traffic volumes locally and regionally because an upgraded road would incentivise increased travel. This could cause secondary environmental effects such as increased pollution, noise, and increased visitation of natural areas, which are not necessarily considered in Plans of Management and other planning documents. Presumably if the project were not to proceed, people would be forced to consider alternatives to travelling, which could ultimately reduce environmental impacts.

- Groundwater Chemistry. The report appears to omit assessment of material particles from the project entering the groundwater and affecting the surrounding natural environment. Presumably construction materials will not be completely inert.

- Timing of Field Surveys. The report appears to indicate that biodiversity and ecological field surveys were undertaken from September 2021. The area is known to have been affected by the 2019-20 bushfires and would presumably be experiencing recovery during the survey period. The report could assess whether the survey periods correctly accounted for seasonal, yearly, and decadal environmental variations.

- Source of Project Materials. The report does not mention the source of materials that will be brought to the site for the project’s construction. Since some of these materials would need to be obtained from a different location, the environmental impact on those areas is not covered by the report.

Please find attached files

My name is Dr Jo Tibbitts. I have the privilege of living in Blackheath, NSW, 2785 on the narrow ridge between the Kanimbla and Megalong Valleys to the west and the Grose Valley to the East.

I would like to acknowledge that I live on the traditional lands of the Dharug and Gundungurra people, and pay my respect to Elders past, present and future.

I object completely to any extension of the Great Western Highway (including any sort of tunnel) between Katoomba to Hartley and am totally opposed to allowing the GWH within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area to be used as a heavy truck corridor between Sydney and the west. To truly treat the GBMWHA as a WHA we need only local and tourist traffic on our roads no pass through traffic.

Because so many of the following issues relate to areas beyond this EIS, a single study (Full Project EIS) of the whole GWH Duplication Project is needed to ensure that the interconnected and wider environment is fully considered and addressed. Issues that deserve further consideration include:

• The effect on tourism, residents, schools and liveability of the planned increase in the size of trucks passing through ALL villages across the Blue Mountains.
• The predictable negative impacts on the natural environment of the World Heritage Area (downstream beyond the narrow (1500mm) corridor covered by the EIS and the narrower REF'S.
• The predicted reduction of inflow into the drinking water catchments and into the World Heritage Area.
• The predicted change in pH of the water flowing into the catchment and World Heritage Area.
• The increased risk of disturbance to shallow aquifers near Evans Lookout Road feeding the endangered peat swamp vegetation communities.
• The negative effects on the iconic downstream tourist attractions (eg the Grand Canyon).
• The negative effects on Threatened and Endangered Species across the area covered by the EIS but also across the very narrow areas covered by all of the REF's.
• The negative effect of the ongoing construction on local heritage attractions, struggling tourist industry and the local residents (whose local road is the GWH) across all three affected villages as well as across the entire City of the Blue Mountains.
• The unstated effects upon air quality in the villages and National Park.
• The lack of information on measures to ensure the safety of tunnel workers.
• The lack of information on how dangerous goods will be transported through the Upper Blue Mountains.
• The lack of decision as to whether the project is a ‘Controlled Project’.
• The ‘less than best’ plan requiring very significant Federal Investment.
*The need for independent oversight of contractors, particularly when 'mitigation and management measures' are still to be developed.
* The lack of consideration of the differences in the effects of noise when results of wind direction is included in all studies.
* The extent of the impacts of the increase in the amount of freight and the size of trucks that the tunnel will facilitate in Medlow Bath, Katoomba and all the villages along the GWH.
* The lack of any INDEPENDENT OPTIONS STUDY of alternatives to the planned duplication of the highway through Medlow Bath as will be required very soon after the completion of the tunnel .
* The lack of information on when and how the existing highway will be improved between Blackheath and Little Hartley.
* The false assertion by TfNSW that the specifics of the proposed construction site (at the corner of Evans Lookout Road and the Highway) has been 'approved' when the relevant and essential details have only been revealed in the current EIS.
* The sudden revelation with no detail of the impacts of a pile of uncovered tunnel spoil to be stored in the headwaters of local drinking water catchments and upstream of major tourist attractions and the World Heritage Area.
* The inability of TfNSW to consider the need for an attractive, tourist-friendly and resident-friendly entrance to the village of Blackheath.
* The inability for the very expensive tunnel to deliver sufficiently improved and acceptable travel times (as required by both levels of government) when it will be stymied by the increase in congestion at Medlow Bath.
* There is no guaranteed funding for the tunnel and therefore a full EIS is not only possible but essential to ensure that the funding of the whole project is not only a good investment for the governments but that the maximum beneficial outcomes are achieved.
* The proposed solution by TfNSW to address congestion has been shown overseas to be ineffective. The proposed technology of widening the GWH is now superseded by more modern technology that doe not impose stop/start traffic movements on wider roads but uses more appropriate traffic management strategies that keep vehicles moving at a safe speed, compatible with the environment.

I support the Blackheath to Little Hartley 11 km tunnel as the only way to upgrade the Great Western Highway through Blackheath and Mount Victoria.

The Great Western Highway (the Highway) is, like the Pacific and the Hume Highways, a national freight corridor of strategic importance. It is a vital link between Sydney, Port Botany, and the NSW Central West and beyond.

The Blackheath to Little Hartley 11 km tunnel is of strategic importance for the Upper Blue Mountains as well as the Central West because it will address the major bottlenecks of Blackheath, Mount Victoria, and Victoria Pass.

There is broad agreement across the political aisle that the only way to deliver a four-lane dual carriageway across the Blue Mountains is to upgrade the Great Western Highway between Katoomba and Lithgow. The Bells Line of Road corridor is not a suitable alternative because of cost and environmental factors. There are no other viable corridors available to provide four-lane dual carriageway across the Blue Mountains.

The existing Highway through Blackheath, Mount Victoria and Victoria Pass remains a major bottleneck with a single lane alignment that follows the original 1813 Blue Mountains crossing route. The Highway through Blackheath is severely hampered by the very narrow corridor around the Govetts Leap Road and Bundarra Street intersection and the main western railway level crossing. Traffic lights at this intersection have become a major impediment to the flow of traffic during peak and holiday periods. These lights have also severely hampered access to the emerging tourism destination of Megalong Valley.

There are also traffic flow impediments around Mount Victoria. The highway corridor at the Station Street intersection is extremely narrow with heritage restrictions in place prohibiting the highway from being widened at this point.

The Highway between Blackheath and Little Hartley has been subject to regular closure due to bushfire, snow, black ice and accidents.

Recent weather events have strained the ageing infrastructure along this stretch of the Highway, with landslips and other related problems. This has severely impacted the flow of traffic to the NSW Central West and beyond and has caused a significant drag on tourism in the Upper Blue Mountains and NSW Central West. The movement of freight has also been severely impacted.

Victoria Pass, which was hand-built by Convicts in 1832, is also a major bottleneck which was earmarked to be bypassed by the Rudd/Gillard Government in 2008.

The adverse social and economic impacts caused by the frequent weekend and holiday congestion issues around Blackheath and the unreliability of the Highway due to weather events and natural disasters such as bushfire, snow and ice are very significant. With failing infrastructure, some of which was hand-built by convicts, we cannot afford to find ourselves again in the situation when, due to both the closure of the Highway and the Bells Line of Road, the NSW Government and its agencies are forced to advise both the travelling public and the freight industry to avoid the Blue Mountains, as has occurred several times in 2021 and 2022.

Sustainable tourism development in Blackheath, Megalong and Mount Victoria is being significantly constrained by the lack of a Tunnel. Both visitors and employees struggle to get to and from these locations on weekends, during holiday periods and when the ageing highway infrastructure fails, which has already occurred several times in 2021 and 2022. Local businesses have reported that visitation rates for walking, rock climbing, camping, vineyards, and other tourist activities in Blackheath, Mount Victoria, the Megalong, and Grose Valleys are being impacted by the lack of a reliable Highway corridor.

The Blackheath to Little Hartley 11 km tunnel will address the above issues and provide significant social and economic benefits to the Upper Blue Mountains as well as the Central West.

The Tunnel also has a much lighter footprint on the environment compared to a surface duplication and provides significantly more long-term benefits for local ecosystems connected to the Blue Mountains National Park and the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

The Tunnel also provides certainty to the residents and business owners of Blackheath and Mount Victoria because, unlike other highway upgrade proposals, the Tunnel does not require any property resumption and has a very positive impact on social amenity.

I note the EIS is extensive, and comprehensive, and appears to work towards addressing the concerns of our community, particularly in relation to the local environment.

I thank TfNSW for the EIS consultation process and praise their project team for working constructively with our community during this process.

Therefore, I strongly believe the construction of the Blackheath to Little Hartley 11 km tunnel must proceed as quickly as possible, and on this basis, I support the EIS, subject to the following conditions;

Environment
That the proposed Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and the Construction Transport and Access Management Plan (CTAMP) including related mitigation recommendations, measures, strategies, and actions contained in these plans become conditions of approval and be fully funded and fully implemented where feasible and practicable, in consultation with relevant stakeholders including the local community.

That the proposed Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNVMP), the Construction Flora and Fauna Management Plan (CFFMP), the Construction Soil and Water Management Plan (CSWMP), the Place Design and Landscape Plan (PDLP), the Social Impact Management Plan (SIMP) and the Bushfire Management Plan all become conditions of approval, and relevant stakeholders, including the community, be involved in the development of such plans.

In addition, that further ground water investigations of the Lake Greaves catchment, as noted in the EIS, be completed and that the results and related recommendations of such investigations be published and implemented in full where feasible. This is to ensure maximum environmental protection for the Greaves catchment during tunnel and portal construction.

Further, that appropriate environmental monitoring and reporting be put in place during tunnel construction.

Noise, Dust and Vibration Recipients – Evans Lookout Road
Based on information included in the EIS it appears there are approximately 30 households around the Evans Lookout Road precinct which may be impacted by noise, dust and vibration during tunnel and portal construction.

Of these 30 households, there are 15 households who may be impacted by noise and vibration after the opening of the tunnel.

As a condition of approval, I request that these households be provided with appropriate support and explicit measures to mitigate noise, dust and vibration impacts. This may include building modifications such as double glazing, soundproofing and vibration offset measures. There should also be a buffer zone of no less than 100 metres between these households and the Blackheath tunnel portal construction site. Any spoil at the Blackheath tunnel portal construction site should be covered to mitigate dust and prevent sedimentation issues to the Greaves catchment.

I also request, as a condition of approval, that dilapidation audits of existing at-risk houses be undertaken prior to portal and tunnel construction.

There needs to be a commitment from TfNSW to ensure there is ongoing engagement with and support for these households and those in surrounding areas if the area impacted during construction is larger than identified in the EIS.

Consultation
As a condition of approval Transport for NSW (TfNSW) commits to ongoing community consultation throughout the life of the Blackheath to Little Hartley 11 km tunnel project, and to engage and incorporate feedback, particularly in relation to the seven proposed plans noted above.

Local Economy
The EIS notes the potential impact on the local economy during and post Tunnel construction.

To mitigate any potential social and economic impacts during and post construction of the Tunnel, I request that TfNSW undertake, as a condition of this EIS, to repair the current highway alignment between Blackheath and Little Hartley to provide reliable access for residents, construction operators, and tourists.

I also believe TfNSW should, as a goodwill gesture and to improve access for residents, tourists, and construction workers, reinstate an hourly train service from Katoomba to Lithgow. This would take pressure off parking and vehicle movements and facilitate movement of tourists and visitors to Medlow Bath, Blackheath and Mount Victoria during the construction phase of the Tunnel and eastern section of the Katoomba to Lithgow GWH Upgrade Project.

Water Pipeline Supply
A condition of approval should also be that the construction of a water pipeline from Lithgow to Little Hartley be prioritized to avoid significant and potentially damaging water transport issues for the TBMs located in Little Hartley.

Construction compounds – Blackheath and Little Hartley
I strongly believe the EIS mitigation controls should prevail over the prior approvals obtained under the REFs for the Eastern and Western Sections for the Blackheath and Little Hartley.

Please note that I now live in Leura, but the website does not allow me to change my address. I also have family members living in Blackheath who will be impacted by the Project.

In general I support the project but with some provisos and concerns.

1. I am concerned about the impact of the Construction Site at the Blackheath end and its potential to negatively impact the fragile ecosystem that exists to the east of the proposed site. Specifically, the swamps and watercourses that lead to the canyons and waterfalls into the Grose Valley are essential to the amenity and quality of the area, making it into the attraction it is but also supporting a wide variety of flora and fauna that will be affected by the construction and running of the site. Considerable care must be taken to ensure this does not happen, both in setting up the site and in its continued operation to 2031 and beyond.

2. I am concerned about the effect that "high productivity vehicles longer than 20 metres" (i.e. B Doubles) will have on the rest of the Blue Mountains towns between Blackheath and Penrith. Living near a major road is hazardous to health, as research published this week shows. What those who live along the highway in the mountains don't need is more pollutants from the increased number of heavy vehicles affecting their health. What is being done to mitigate that increased volume of heavy vehicles and hence pollution that the completed tunnel will allow?

3. In regard to the dispersal of vehicle exhausts, how much attention has been given to the higher number of Electric Vehicles that will be on the roads before the tunnel is even opened? By 2030, the number of polluting vehicles will have diminished considerably and the need for massive exhaust stacks should be much smaller. I'm not sure what will happen in regard to heavy vehicles which need to travel large distances - presumably, they will be hydrogen powered or electric powered. Given these factors, the need for massive exhaust stacks which have high visual impact (as noted in Chapter 18 of the EIS) is lessened considerably. On that basis, I think the portal emissions option is a better choice because at some later stage, there will be minimal or no need for exhaust gases to be extracted from the tunnel. Having said that, if a decision is made preferencing exhaust stacks, then I believe there should be more than just one at each end but smaller and less visually damaging. Having at least one more near Soldiers Pinch would mean that those who live close to the planned stacks at Blackheath and Little Hartley would have less pollution being pumped out near them.

The “Strategic Context” section of the EIS should explore things (of a background nature) that impact the Blackheath-Little Hartley Tunnel, and things that would be impacted by the Tunnel, but fails to address these things adequately.

For one, the Tunnel is one of several megaprojects in NSW (mainly in and around Sydney) having a high priority, while other critical needs become secondary by default, because public funding only goes so far.

These are questions of disparity, in terms of needs, funding and affordability, and of relevance to finding timely solutions to the main economic, social and environmental challenges for roads and transport in NSW.

In that vein, the attachment elaborates on a range of contextual things that warrant consideration in assessing the GWS Tunnel option.

I am a homeowner at the top end of Evans Lookout Rd Blackheath and am opposed to the Great Western Highway Blackheath to Little Hartely upgrade.
My opposition to this is mainly the fact that with a construction zone being in the National Park at my back door will impact on my lifestyle.
I am a nurse working shifts and would be unable to sleep and recouperate after long shifts.
I agree that there should be a tunnel and an upgrade as the current model is not sufficient for the growing populations and increased traffic. It is dangerous when there are accidents as it essentially cuts off access to the upper mountains.
It is important to ensure the safety of the drinking water as well as the delicate environment in the area which I have no doubt would be significantly impacted by the construction site.
I would be happier if the entrance to the tunnel was closer to Medlow Bath as I believe the impact on residents and the waterways would be far less.
THe Environmental Impact Study does not alleviate my concerns towards the environment

Certainly issues relating to the extensive traffic build up through Blackheath need a solution.
My Objections to the current planning of the solution are:
GWH beyond the tunnel.The tunnel would now allow large 36 metre B Double trucks to access the GWH beyond Tunnel Hill.currently the GWH beyond the proposed tunnel is totally unsuitable to accomodate safely trucks of this size. Between Emu Plains and Katoomba there are significant number of varied speed limits incorporating urban areas school zones etc. How does Tfor NSW intend to address these safety issues?
Ventilation and tunnel emissions. Talking with your team at the information afternoon I noted that the ease of emissions through tunnel portal is by far the better option, although I believe historically in NSW portals are the preferred option. There appears to be no difference in the output. However , aesthetically portals , from the pictures provided, appear to be extremely ugly and not in keeping with the local environment. Either options however have no information as to how emissions are to be treated.
Two tunnel option. Access to and from Mt Victoria and Blackheath. There is currently no proposal for exit / entry to these two townships. Access to them is required for residents including schools buses, tourists . A two tunnel option would allow for this. also the current weigh station as one of the additional truck stops impacting no local residents .
Plant , equipment, water , parking. The brunt of the required infrastructure for the building of the tunnel will be borne by the Hartley Valley community . Added to this construction with be 24 hours per day and spread over potentially 10 years of construction.This is unacceptable.
Truck stops. It appears an additional truck stop has now been included at Hartley Fresh. This is a new addition and unwanted. Three have been proposed in the Valley. Location of the spacing of these truck stops need to be reconsidered.
Water -the source and impact of the extensive need of water on local farms, housing and fire safety needs further consideration and clarification .

We own 40-50 Thirroul Avenue Blackheath which is directly affected by the proposal. We have read the EIS in part but need more time to complete a submission as we have to go overseas until 7 March 2023. May we please have an extension to 13 March 2023.

I do not want my personal details to be made public

Application Name: Great Western Highway, Blackheath to Little Hartley Tunnel EIS

Application Number: SSI-22004371


Dear Madam/Sir,

I object to the proposal.

My main reason for lodging this submission and objecting to this proposal is that I am particularly concerned about the impacts the proposed tunnel and it’s construction might have on the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. These must be minimised in every instance. The Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area is a significant site of international value and a matter of national environmental significance in which all interventions must be thoroughly examined and addressed.

There is a significant risk that the tunnel’s construction could also negatively impact aquifers supplying groundwater to groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and their dependent species, along both sides of the proposed tunnel corridor, including within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Changes to water flow because of construction are expected. The continued health of the aquifers is very important.

I am also concerned by the threat of reduced groundwater to the Commonwealth-listed Peat Swamps that align the corridor and the populations of endangered Giant Dragonfly and Blue Mountains Water Skink, both groundwater dependent species that have been recorded in the swamps between Medlow Bath and Mt Victoria. Australia already suffers from the highest level of wildlife extinctions in the world. Disrupting critical habitat for these species only increases the rate and speed of extinction.

A further concern remains for the health of the surface water, in particular Greaves Creek which could be damaged by the tunnelling processes.

Despite this EIS being released, I call on the federal government for a full EIS across the entire Great Western Highway project upgrade to ensure that matters of national environmental significance are addressed. The current piecemeal approach, dividing the upgrade into sections for review, is totally inadequate as it will not provide a true understanding of the cumulative impact and long-term consequences for the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

For the only planet we have.

I have no reportable political donations (including donations of $1000 or more) made within the previous two years to declare.

I do not want my personal details to be made public

Application Name: Great Western Highway, Blackheath to Little Hartley Tunnel EIS

Application Number: SSI-22004371


Dear Madam/Sir,

I object to the proposal.

My main reason for lodging this submission and objecting to this proposal is that I am particularly concerned about the impacts the proposed tunnel and it’s construction might have on the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. These must be minimised in every instance. The Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area is a significant site of international value and a matter of national environmental significance in which all interventions must be thoroughly examined and addressed.

There is a significant risk that the tunnel’s construction could also negatively impact aquifers supplying groundwater to groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and their dependent species, along both sides of the proposed tunnel corridor, including within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Changes to water flow because of construction are expected. The continued health of the aquifers is very important.

I am also concerned by the threat of reduced groundwater to the Commonwealth-listed Peat Swamps that align the corridor and the populations of endangered Giant Dragonfly and Blue Mountains Water Skink, both groundwater dependent species that have been recorded in the swamps between Medlow Bath and Mt Victoria. Australia already suffers from the highest level of wildlife extinctions in the world. Disrupting critical habitat for these species only increases the rate and speed of extinction.

A further concern remains for the health of the surface water, in particular Greaves Creek which could be damaged by the tunnelling processes.

Despite this EIS being released, I call on the federal government for a full EIS across the entire Great Western Highway project upgrade to ensure that matters of national environmental significance are addressed. The current piecemeal approach, dividing the upgrade into sections for review, is totally inadequate as it will not provide a true understanding of the cumulative impact and long-term consequences for the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

For the only planet we have.

I have no reportable political donations (including donations of $1000 or more) made within the previous two years to declare.

We are concerned that the significant impact the proposed tunnel and its construction might have on the World Heritage Area.

Aquifers supplying groundwater to groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and their fragile species, along both sides of the tunnel corridor, are at significant risk as changes to water flow are inevitable.

Other matters such as sediment run-off into the GBMWHA will be considerable, underground digging apparatus, 24-hour worksites with artificial light pollution over several years will negatively impact the GBMWHA irretrievably. From the numerous online descriptions, I am not clear where the spoil from the tunnel will be placed.

A reduction in groundwater to the Commonwealth-listed Peat Swamps, particularly those near Blackheath, poses a real threat to their populations of Giant Dragonfly and Blue Mountains Water Skink, which are both endangered.

The current piecemeal approach, dividing the upgrade into sections for review, is totally inadequate as it won’t provide a true understanding of the cumulative impact and long-term consequences for the World Heritage Area.

Longer term the tunnel, if completed, inevitably will see the villages east of Blackheath be overwhelmed with extra B-double trucks competing with local traffic right through to Glenbrook/Lapstone (near where the M4 freeway starts).

The highly voluminous EIS (30 chapters and as many appendices) needs to be re-worked to consider the overall impact of allowing the burgeoning Central West region HG traffic, with a solution that does not adversely affect the natural and built environment and local populations of the Blue Mountains quite as significantly as the current excessive tome. Is there a brief overview for lay people?

Even the “Environment Impact Statement - Summary” is 35 pages in length. This is unreasonable for members of the public to plough through, maybe though this is the reason to discourage submissions.

The new process for submitting via Major Projects has added an extra layer of complexity for MOPs (members of the public). Particularly those with prior DPIE accounts which had different password criteria.

Regards

While I support the building of the tunnel, it is completely inappropriate to create a construction site in the proposed location on the highway next to Evans Lookout Road. This location is in Blackheath designated special catchment area, set aside for water catchment to supply hundreds of homes. We currently do not allow entry to this area at all, even for walking or pets, so driving trucks and construction vehicles through the area is absolutely moronic and astronomically inconsiderate to the local township.