Skip to main content

State Significant Infrastructure

Determination

NorthConnex

Hornsby Shire

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

0

Consolidated Approval

Consolidated Approval

Modifications

Determination

Archive

DGRs (3)

EIS (114)

Response to Submissions (22)

Assessment (4)

Determination (6)

Approved Documents

Community Consultative Committees and Panels (1)

Reports (2)

Independent Reviews and Audits (1)

Other Documents (1)

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

10/08/2023

29/10/2023

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

Submissions

Filters
Showing 141 - 160 of 1371 submissions
Name Withheld
Object
Wahroonga , New South Wales
Message
I have lived at the above address in Burns road for over 20 years and believe Wahroonga is a unique garden suburb and one of the few left in Sydney. I believe great care should be taken when undertaking projects such as this to ensure that short cuts and "cost effective" measures are not used as an excuse to look after the long term health of the people in the affected area.

Set out below are my detailed comments about the proposal.
30 August 2014
Attention: Director - Infrastructure Projects
Development Assessment Systems & Approvals
Department of Planning & Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney 2001

Dear Director Re: SS1 13_6136 - NorthConnex
Set our below are my comments on the above proposal
In the first instance I would like to discuss some of the very recent points raised by NorthConnex on their website entitled "Addressing misconceptions about the project"

Statement: 'Trees and sound walls concealing the M1 motorway will be removed, along with houses in the vicinity. Neighbourhoods will be exposed to increased noise and pollution.'
Clarification
Sound walls concealing the M1 will not be removed permanently, however some will need to be relocated with new noise walls as part of construction. To construct the project there will need to be some properties and trees removed, but there is also a commitment to carry out landscaping and other urban design treatments.
My Comment: A commitment to carry out landscaping? Is that the best they can do? What about detailed plans and guarantees of minimum standards they will adhere to in ensuring the mature trees are replaced with suitably aged trees and not just bushes and saplings. "other urban design treatments" what does that mean or commit them to do?

Permanent noise walls would be scheduled for completion as early as possible in order to mitigate construction noise. Where possible, the use of temporary noise hoardings would be considered where ancillary construction facilities are in close proximity to sensitive residences.
My Comment: "temporary noise hoardings would be considered" but nothing will actually be done unless NorthConnex is forced to do something about the construction noise.
The existing noise walls along the M1 Motorway have been assessed in the EIS. As an outcome of this assessment, the existing barrier height would be maintained. This is shown in Figure 7-12 noise barriers - north, page 439 of the EIS.
My Comment: The EIS states that a large number of residential properties will be affected by increased noise on completion of the project and will require "noise treatment measures" Originally our house was assessed by NorthConnex for "noise treatment" by a letter dated 18th July 2014 and later rescinded in a further letter dated 25th August 2014. It does not give one a lot of confidence that they are operating at "best practice" which has been used consistently by NorthConnex in numerous documents and public meetings. If this is indeed "best practise" then we are all in trouble.There appears to be no effort made to reduce the impending increase in noise or improve the existing noise barriers. Why not? On reading the fine print it would appear to be not cost effective..... which is a common theme in this project
Statement: 'A single 23 metre high stack (about 8 stories) will pump 9 kilometres of tunnel pollution into our air.'
Clarification
The northern ventilation outlet would be around 15 metres in height, relative to nearby houses and located 23 metres in height relative to the motorway which is lower than the surrounding local roads.
My Comment: So they agree it will be 23 metres in height. Whats the problem and why are they trying to suggest its not that height? In other forums and documents the height of the stack is important in dispersing the "pollution" (tunnel air).
Air quality within the tunnel is maintained to ensure it is safe for users and the same air is dispersed high into the atmosphere through the ventilation the outlets.Vehicles will travel within the tunnel for about six minutes, which is a significantly shorter travel time than Pennant Hills Road. As a result fewer emissions would be generated by vehicles using the tunnel compared to the stationary traffic currently releasing emissions at surface level in the local area for most of the day.
My Comment: "The air quality in the tunnel is maintained" by pushing clean air into the tunnel thereby removing the concentrated polluted air from 9 kilometres of tunnel and sending it into the atmosphere through the ventilation outlet. Nothing happens to the polluted air from 5000 trucks plus other vehicles each day as it is just pushed out of the aforementioned 23 or 15 metre high stack (depending from where you measure!)
Whats the difference between the ocean outfalls where we used to send untreated sewage into the sea and sending dangerous vehicle emissions into the residential suburb of Wahroonga? Have we learnt nothing?
Experience from other motorway tunnels and studies of ambient air quality data from existing Sydney tunnels has confirmed emissions from ventilation outlets have a negligible impact on local and regional air quality, and are so small they cannot be measured.
My Comment: There have been no studies of the ambient air in Wahroonga or anywhere within 1km of the proposed location of the Northern stack. They have recently put one near the brick pit near Pennant Hills road but not in Wahroonga. What are they afraid of?

Statement: 'Not all pollutants are dispersed, a significant proportion will expose the community.'
Clarification
Modelling has shown the effect of the vehicle emissions from the tunnel via the ventilation outlets to be negligible. Tunnels do not create new emissions. They take existing emissions from traffic, dilute them with fresh air and more effectively disperse them higher in the atmosphere through a ventilation outlet (rather than at roadside where they are currently dispersed).
As indicated above, total emissions generated by vehicles using the tunnel would be less than those vehicles using Pennant Hills Road.
My Comment: However what pollution they do create is all concentrated and put into the atmosphere around Wahroonga. They are just moving it from the tunnel to Wahroonga and sending into the air and hoping it will disperse and not be noticed.
Statement: 'No air pollution is treated. No filtration is planned.'
Clarification
There is no tunnel ventilation outlet in Australia that has filtration.
My Comment: Because its expensive to install and run & not cost effective when compared to other pollution reduction measures. (The M5 East Motorway filtration trial removed 200 kilograms of PM10 per year at a cost of around $3.8million per tonne). Air pollution control technology is being used in tunnels in number of countries including Norway, Austria, Germany & Japan.
Statement: 'The tunnel ventilation design hopes to reduce the hazards in the tunnel from the daily pollution from 9,000 cars and 5,000 trucks. Doubts exist as to whether it can achieve this. More doubt surrounds the effectiveness of dispersing these toxins and carcinogens from the stack.'
Clarification
Sydney has a number of tunnels with ventilation systems that have been built and are operating to provide effective and efficient air quality both in tunnel and locally. The proposed tunnel ventilation system is being designed using international standards and tried and trusted technology and there are no doubts about how it will perform. The ventilation system will be designed to meet stringent in-tunnel, local and regional air quality criteria, and to operate under normal and low speed traffic conditions and in emergency situations. The tunnel ventilation system design is discussed in Section 7.3.1 in the EIS.
The air quality modelling detailed in the EIS took into account the tunnel ventilation design and how it performed under two different scenarios - the maximum number of vehicles within the tunnel at one time and having to meet applicable air quality criteria while emitting the maximum concentration of pollutants on a continuous basis. A discussion of the air quality impact assessment scenarios is included in Section 7.3.2, page 462 of the EIS.
The modelling predicted the northern and southern ventilation outlets would have a negligible impact on local air quality. The air quality impact assessment methodology is outlined in Section 7.3.2 of the EIS. The assessment included the in-tunnel traffic volume forecasts for the project in 2019 and 2029. This is shown in Figures 7-16 and 7-17, respectively, in the EIS.
My Comment: The studies (using CALPUFF & CALMET) sourced data from 5 meteorological stations located in the Sydney basin (Lindfield, Terry Hills, Richmond, Prospect and Sydney Airport).No studies were done of the areas around where the proposed ventilation "pollution" stacks are to be located. Again there seems to be an avoidance of looking at the location of the stack and seeing if the proposed location is optimal for dispersing the pollution. Given that the prevailing winds etc are critical in dispersing the pollution why have they not carefully examined that aspect in some detail?
Why not locate the stack at the top of the ridge instead of the valley?

The Department of Planning and Environment has engaged its own air quality specialist to review the air quality modelling assessment for NorthConnex. The Department of Planning and Environment would specify the air quality criteria the tunnel would need to adhere to as part of the planning conditions of consent, otherwise the tunnel could not operate.
My Comment: The tunnel is open after 5 years work and say $3 billion in cost and there is a problem with the air quality and "the tunnel cannot operate". Now what? What is plan B. Clearly it makes no sense to keep the tunnel closed after all that money has been spent so what happens next? The planning consents are watered down and the conditions to operate altered?
Statement: 'Future pollution will increase with up to 100,000 car and truck movements daily.'
Clarification
It is expected around 30,000 vehicles will use the tunnel on opening which will increase to around 40,000 by 2029. This is outlined in page 9 of the Project Overview document and detailed in Appendix E, Table 8-4 of the EIS.
My Comment: The eventual increase in traffic flows will increase pollution and be merely sent in concentrated form to the residents of Wahroonga.
Statement: 'This exposure represents major ongoing health risks including cancer and chronic lung disease. Traffic air pollution causes acute lung disease, asthma attacks, increased blood clotting, strokes, heart attacks, lung cancer, chronic blood vessel disease. It is especially hazardous to children, pregnant women and the aged.'

Clarification
Road tunnels do not generate pollution; vehicles using both surface roads and tunnels are the cause of the emissions. "It is well known air pollution can be harmful to health, especially for more vulnerable members of the community."
My Comment: This is essentially the problem. We are taking 9 kilometres of vehicle emissions and sending them up in the air at Wahroonga and hoping nature will take care of the rest and that there will be negligible change in the air quality. This aspect is crucial to the whole NorthConnex plan yet they have failed to undertake any air quality monitoring of the affected area so we do not have any true base to compare against future pollution levels. On that basis alone the project should not be allowed to proceed as planned until they provide the Wahroonga community a watertight plan to ensure the health of the air that they will breath.



Statement: 'There is no safe level of exposure.'
Clarification
It is acknowledged that for fine particulate matter there is no level identified below which adverse effects no longer occur.
My Comment: Again we have agreement that there is a health problem for those who live or go to school near the stack.

Statement: A local study by Cowie et al looked at the health effects of the Lane Cove Tunnel, which found residents living around the tunnel ventilation stack reported more upper and lower respiratory symptoms and had lower lung volumes after the tunnel opened.
Clarification
The assertion above is a partial outcome from the paper by Cowie et al (2012). It is correct the study did report more upper and lower respiratory tract symptoms and lower lung volumes after the tunnel opened, however this was only for the first year and did not persist after the first year of operation. The study could also not be correlated with any change in air quality in the same area.
Some reasons for the observations made in the study were speculated but could not be determined. The lead author for the study has provided further clarification on the outcome of this study in the media this year (Cowie 2014) stating the study showed no increase in air pollutants, and did not show a significant effect that could be attributed to the ventilation outlets.
My Comments: The above is hardly a glowing recommendation for the NorthConnex project which will have the longest tunnel in Australia and much longer than the Lane Cove Tunnel.
Other Comments and questions
I now wish to make a few points regarding the project that have not necessarily been covered in the above.

In reviewing the F3-M2 State Significant Infrastructure Application Report - September 2013 a number of questions arise.
In section 3.2.1 "The project may include an open section in a cutting at Kenley Park and Brickpit Park. The need for and suitability of this opening would be further considered as part of determining the preferred project design.
Question: This no longer appears to be in the project. What issues caused this change?
In section 3.2.4 F3 Freeway "to cater for the connection to the project, modifications to the F# Freeway beyond the northern interchange may be required......it is expected that these works would occur within the existing road reserve and may extend around one kilometre north of the Edgeworth David overpass at Wahroonga".
Question: Why has this not happened and instead residential houses are being acquired ?
In section 4.4.1 Air Quality ...."Major air pollutants emitted from vehicles...These pollutants are potentially harmful to human health"
Question: Given the above what guarantees is NorthConnex and the Government giving the residents and schoolchildren of Wahroonga & Waitara about the quality of air that they will be forced to breath and having no adverse health impact in the future.
In section 5.2.2 Potential Impacts. Wahroonga Heritage Conservation Area. The location of project infrastructure would be designed based on the avoidance of potential impacts where possible including avoidance of the Wahroonga Conservation Area....
Question: Given the above comments how can they justify the acquisition of houses, widening the road and building the stack and other facilities at the proposed location in Bareena Avenue

The Equilibria Proposal
I have studied the Equilibria proposal and it offers numerous advantages over the NorthConnex project and It addresses many of the concerns of residents in Wahroonga.
Unsolicited proposal from NorthConnex.
In looking at this project it appears to have been designed to achieve a financial outcome and deliver returns to investors and therefore the construction costs and operating costs have been the major driver in the overall design of the tunnel. Unlike a tunnel project where the relevant government department works out the best long term route and design. At that point it may work with Private enterprise to build the project.
Whilst this project takes trucks off Pennant Hills road (great) and provides a seamless link with the south and west it will not alleviate the traffic from the north wishing to go the city or anywhere down the Pacific Highway. That in my view is a significant draw back of this overall project. Had the RED OPTION route (see State significant infrastructure application report) been chosen which would intersect with the M2 much further south at Macquarie Park then a significant portion of daily traffic from the north which presently uses the Pacific Highway would use this tunnel instead thereby taking traffic from two inadequate and congested roads.
The NorthConnex proposal will in my view delay considerably to the numbers of years (10+) before any serious planning and work is done on the overall preferred long term option being strategic corridor C (the northern route and part of the Sydney Orbital)
Ventilation Stacks
It is proposed to have only two ventilation outlets (north & south) thereby concentrating the emissions over a small area. Why would it not be fairer and less risky to the health of Wahroonga residents to spread these over the length of the tunnel by having 3-5 other Vents operating?
Apparently the ventilation stacks work best when placed very close to the portals. Yet the proposed placement of the northern stack is some distance from the portal. Why is this?
I also note that there are no Ventilation stacks proposed for the two portals located at the Pacific Highway entry and exit near Lucinda Avenue. Why is this?
CAPS submission
I have seen a draft of their submission and fully endorse its comments.
Conclusion
NorthConnex has not adequately addressed the air quality concerns of the residents of Wahroonga.
There has been no survey of the air quality in Wahroonga to establish a solid base to compare with any changes that may occur as a result of the polluting stacks. An independent study needs to be undertaken first before any further work or approvals are given.
NorthConnex should provide full details of its plan "B" should the air quality not meet the agreed guidelines (thereby closing the tunnel for vehicle use) before any approvals are given.
NorthConnex should be requested to supply for consideration a fully costed proposal for filtration of the emissions before any approval is given.
NorthConnex should be requested to supply for consideration a fully costed proposal for the northern tunnel to be extended 1-2 kilometres thereby moving the ventilation stacks into bush and industrial area. This would take the health risks away from a densely populated area and have the added benefit of reducing noise in the area. Again this should be done before any approval is given and enable the relevant parties to consider all the options available rather than just that proposed by NorthConnex.
Yew Wee CHUA
Object
WAHROONGA , New South Wales
Message
31 August 2014

Director - Infrastructure Projects
Department of Planning and Environment
Number: SSI 13_6136
Major Projects Assessment
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001

Via online form: http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=6136

NorthConnex Application Number: SSI 13_6136

Please find below my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.

Firstly I would like to state we object to the project as described in the EIS.

I have a high level of concern regarding the following issues and request that these be considered by NorthConnex and the Department of Planning. In regards to the NorthConnex tunnel, I am concerned about:

1. Placement of the northern ventilation stack in the centre of a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga, where 9,300 school children will be exposed, as well as multiple aged care facilities, hospitals, businesses and homes.

2. The placement of the northern ventilation stack in a valley in Wahroonga where there are often low wind speeds, which will result in poor dispersion and exposure to community to high levels of tunnel emission.

3. I am highly concerned about the multiple large scale research studies that suggest the impacts of air pollutants on health are serious. These include increased death from heart disease, increased risks of lung cancer, stroke, poor lung growth in children, increased asthma, and recent research suggesting low birth weight for pregnant women, increased autism, and congenital heart defects. These studies confirm air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans which cause the above health problems.

4. I am concerned about the project including future provisions for portal emissions in densely populated areas, which will result in emissions remaining at ground level, and hence exposing the local population to pollutants. I am also concerned that NorthConnex's claim that there will no portal emissions from current proposal cannot be verified.

5. I am concerned about the large amount of diesel emissions which will be emitted from the NorthConnex tunnel, as it is being designed for heavy freight to bypass Pennant Hills Rd. Diesel emissions have been classified as carcinogenic by the World Health Organisation, and also contain a larger number of fine particles which penetrate deep into lung tissue and remain there causing inflammation.

6. I am concerned about the air quality within the tunnel which is shown in the EIS to have exceedences above standards for pollutants such as NO2, and haze from particulate matter at the ends of the tunnel.

7. I am concerned about the multiple flaws in the air quality modelling of the northern stack in the EIS. These include:
a) extrapolation of meteorological data from other weather stations which do not reflect the local meteorology, local topography, and the valley location.
b) The use of a coarse topographical model
c) The failure to consider polluted intake air from the Pennant Hills/M2 interchange as part of the project contribution to air quality at Wahroonga
d) the background air quality being based on air quality at Lindfield and Prospect and the lack of any actual data on PM2.5

8. I am concerned that a full and transparent options assessment process was not undertaken to assess alternative designs for the project. Unlike other tunnel projects in Sydney there are alternatives for locating the stack and portals in non-residential areas.

9. I am concerned that the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is cursory and unconvincing.

To address my concerns I request that the following actions are undertaken:

1. The air quality and human health impact assessment need to be revised to address the issues raised above.
2. An independent options assessment process should be undertaken to assess alternative locations for the ventilation stack and portals.
3. To undertake a Life Cycle Analysis and assessment for the provision of filtration
4. A long term health study on children and residents in areas impacted by stack discharges be included as part of the conditions of approval.
5. A comprehensive air quality monitoring program is developed and implemented.
6. An independent review of the ventilation system is undertaken to ensure that NorthConnex's claim of no portal emissions is justified.
7. Portal emissions from NorthConnex in the future are banned.
8. The Submissions Report/Preferred Project be exhibited to allow the community to respond to the revised information contained in the report.
9. The Department does not approve the project in its current form as it clearly does not meet the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development as required by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Dr Yew Wee CHUA
20 Koora Ave
Wahroonga NSW 2076
Mobile: 0432293666
Ee Wan NG
Object
WAHROONGA , New South Wales
Message
31 August 2014

Director - Infrastructure Projects
Department of Planning and Environment
Number: SSI 13_6136
Major Projects Assessment
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001

Via online form: http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=6136

NorthConnex Application Number: SSI 13_6136

Please find below my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.

Firstly I would like to state we object to the project as described in the EIS.

I have a high level of concern regarding the following issues and request that these be considered by NorthConnex and the Department of Planning. In regards to the NorthConnex tunnel, I am concerned about:

1. Placement of the northern ventilation stack in the centre of a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga, where 9,300 school children will be exposed, as well as multiple aged care facilities, hospitals, businesses and homes.

2. The placement of the northern ventilation stack in a valley in Wahroonga where there are often low wind speeds, which will result in poor dispersion and exposure to community to high levels of tunnel emission.

3. I am highly concerned about the multiple large scale research studies that suggest the impacts of air pollutants on health are serious. These include increased death from heart disease, increased risks of lung cancer, stroke, poor lung growth in children, increased asthma, and recent research suggesting low birth weight for pregnant women, increased autism, and congenital heart defects. These studies confirm air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans which cause the above health problems.

4. I am concerned about the project including future provisions for portal emissions in densely populated areas, which will result in emissions remaining at ground level, and hence exposing the local population to pollutants. I am also concerned that NorthConnex's claim that there will no portal emissions from current proposal cannot be verified.

5. I am concerned about the large amount of diesel emissions which will be emitted from the NorthConnex tunnel, as it is being designed for heavy freight to bypass Pennant Hills Rd. Diesel emissions have been classified as carcinogenic by the World Health Organisation, and also contain a larger number of fine particles which penetrate deep into lung tissue and remain there causing inflammation.

6. I am concerned about the air quality within the tunnel which is shown in the EIS to have exceedences above standards for pollutants such as NO2, and haze from particulate matter at the ends of the tunnel.

7. I am concerned about the multiple flaws in the air quality modelling of the northern stack in the EIS. These include:
a) extrapolation of meteorological data from other weather stations which do not reflect the local meteorology, local topography, and the valley location.
b) The use of a coarse topographical model
c) The failure to consider polluted intake air from the Pennant Hills/M2 interchange as part of the project contribution to air quality at Wahroonga
d) the background air quality being based on air quality at Lindfield and Prospect and the lack of any actual data on PM2.5

8. I am concerned that a full and transparent options assessment process was not undertaken to assess alternative designs for the project. Unlike other tunnel projects in Sydney there are alternatives for locating the stack and portals in non-residential areas.

9. I am concerned that the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is cursory and unconvincing.

To address my concerns I request that the following actions are undertaken:

1. The air quality and human health impact assessment need to be revised to address the issues raised above.
2. An independent options assessment process should be undertaken to assess alternative locations for the ventilation stack and portals.
3. To undertake a Life Cycle Analysis and assessment for the provision of filtration
4. A long term health study on children and residents in areas impacted by stack discharges be included as part of the conditions of approval.
5. A comprehensive air quality monitoring program is developed and implemented.
6. An independent review of the ventilation system is undertaken to ensure that NorthConnex's claim of no portal emissions is justified.
7. Portal emissions from NorthConnex in the future are banned.
8. The Submissions Report/Preferred Project be exhibited to allow the community to respond to the revised information contained in the report.
9. The Department does not approve the project in its current form as it clearly does not meet the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development as required by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Ms Ee Wan NG
20 Koora Ave
Wahroonga NSW 2076
Christine Macfadyen
Comment
West PEnnant Hills , New South Wales
Message
I am very concerned regarding the fact that the 9km North Connex proposed stack for the tunnel will not be filtered. There will be dangerous particulate matter in the particles which a) are cancer causing and b) affect all those living in the vicinity of the stack regarding air quality and even down to the cleanliness of the washing on the clothes line!

I do not understand, with the danger of fracking and the understanding that this can lead to pollution of our water table, that Governments can undermine the health of their constituents by continuing to make unpopular decisions affecting them. I refer to the mistakes of the M5 East.

Aside from that, West Pennant Hills is a pretty suburb, full of trees and for the most part, well maintained. It is obvious that the stacks need to be moved from the middle of Pennant Hills Road (positioning them in the middle of a suburban area) to the Pennant Hills Golf Course, a public course where the stacks can be hidden. Of course, the filtration needs to be in place if the stacks are on this side of the road also. I believe the RTA/RMS own 4 parcels of land along the golf club side of the road. Please use some common sense. There seems to be precious little of it shown by Governments at the moment.

I also believe we could see up to 1800 construction vehicles per day on our local roads? Are you mad? This has to be changed immediately. The lack of regard and consideration regarding traffic congestion and pollution is an unconscionable act. Surely there is a means of redirecting the trucks off the main road via a fire duct along the Golf Club that would ensure we reduce the inconvenience and ill health exposure by redesigning the position and access routes.

I have lived in West Pennant Hills all my life. It is not that I am not open to change, but change must make sense and be practical. It makes excellent sense to get the large, dangerous trucks off Pennant Hills Road by diverting them down a tunnel which joins the M1 to the M2 etc. I wrote a white paper some years ago suggesting just this AND utilising distribution pods from which smaller trucks can transfer goods to local suburbs. Pollution and health however must not be denigrated to save costs. It will cost the Government much more in the end trying to medically maintain constituents health.

I just ask for some common sense to be used here. Pretend the stack is next to your house. What would YOU be recommending then?

Kind Regards - concerned constituent
Heather Phillips
Object
Wahroonga , New South Wales
Message
I would like to state that I strongly object to the project as described in the EIS.
I have a high level of concern regarding the placement of the ventilation stack in the densely populated residential area of Wahroonga where 9,300 school children will be exposed, as well as aged care facilities, hospitals, businesses, retail centres and homes. Large scale research studies show that air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans causing serious impacts on health. These include increased death from heart disease, increased risks of lung cancer, poor lung growth in children, increased asthma and many other problems.
I would request that the Department of Planning does not approve the project in its current form. I request that consideration be given to alternative transport options to ease congestion on Pennant Hills Road such as an orbital bypass surface route. At the very least I would ask that consideration be given to raising the height of the stack; the stack for the Cross City Tunnel is much higher, at 65 metres and that tunnel would not have the same, high concentration of large goods vehicles. Filtration of the emissions should also be included.
Karen O'Connor
Comment
West Pennant Hills , New South Wales
Message
We live on busy Aiken Road, nearer to Pennant Hills Road and already find it hazardous trying to get out of our driveway. The slope from Pennant Hills Road down Aiken Road with cars travelling west gaining momentum require us to drive out quickly, before the cars are upon us. There have been some near misses, and lengthy delays just waiting just to leave our driveway safely. Should numerous heavy trucks add an even higher volume of traffic to our road, the risk of accident and injury increases quite dramatically. Of course this is of no consequence to planners where safety does not impact upon them or their families. However, for us, we ask you to consider the alternative route for the hundreds of trucks for the safety for our residents, less damage to our road and less air pollution outside of our front doors on a daily basis.
Name Withheld
Support
North Turramurra , New South Wales
Message
Director - Infrastructure Projects
Department of Planning and Environment
Number SSI 13_6136
Major Projects Assessment
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001
1 September 2014

North Connex Application Number : SSI 13_6136
Please find below my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for North Connex.
Firstly, I wish to say that I have NO OBJECTIONS to the EIS.
It would of course be useful if the stacks were filtered - but if doing so risks delaying this project yet again then it must proceed as currently planned.
It is critical for all those who use local roads and in particular Pennant Hills Road this important piece of infrastructure is built without further delay.
An orbital surface road will not solve the traffic issue in northern Sydney and cannot be supported.
A revised project form would set this project back even further and should not be contemplated.
I look forward to this project proceeding asap.


Yours Faithfully
Name Withheld
Support
West Pennant Hills , New South Wales
Message

The proposed construction traffic route on local roads (Aiken, Oakes, Eaton and Karloon) will further increase the growing traffic congestion in this area. Local traffic in this area is already achieving gridlock even beyond peak hours as increasing numbers of commuters from WPH Valley, Cherrybrook and Castle Hill areas utilise Aiken & Oakes Road as an alternative (southern) access to the M2 via Murray Farm Road.
Once the NorthConnex tunnel is completed this will also be the ONLY access to the tunnel for these commuters adding to an already unacceptable local roads bottleneck.
Oakes Road in particular is currently the only southward exit for local WPH Valley commuters (crossing under the M2) without adding to the Castle Hill Road & Pennant Hills Road gridlock. If this is to also be the only access route to connect to the tunnel the roads will not cope.
Traffic flow alternatives for local WPH roads needs to be addressed - post NorthConnex. Alternative south and east bound exits from WPH Valley such as upgrading Aiken Rd, Pennant Hills road intersection and allowing RH turns as well as alternative M2 and Pennant Hills Rd crossing points should be considered.
carole dowd
Object
Carlingford , New South Wales
Message
A re-assessment of the whole North Connex is required. The health of affected residents at both ends of the tunnel MUST be considered. Air quality will be severely compromised due to the location of stacks & the volume of heavy vehicle usage. 'Crashes' on Pennant Hills Rd are generally not the cause of delays, it is rather 'breakdowns'. The air pollution monitoring in Rainbow Park Reserve would be invalid due to its being placed in an elevated position with robust cross-winds.
Mark Johnson
Object
North Wahroonga , New South Wales
Message
Director - Infrastructure Projects
Department of Planning and Environment
Number: SSI 13_6136
Major Projects Assessment
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001
NorthConnex Application Number: SSI 13_6136
Please find below my/our submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.
Firstly I/we would like to state we object to the project as described in the EIS.
We have a high level of concern regarding the following issues and request that these be considered by
NorthConnex and the Department of Planning. In regards to the NorthConnex tunnel, I am concerned about:
1. Placement of the northern ventilation stack in the centre of a densely populated residential area in
Wahroonga, where 9,300 school children will be exposed, as well as multiple aged care facilities, hospitals,
businesses and homes.
2. We am highly concerned about the multiple large scale research studies that suggest the impacts of air
pollutants on health are serious. These include increased death from heart disease, increased risks of
lung cancer, stroke, poor lung growth in children, increased asthma, and recent research suggesting low
birth weight for pregnant women, increased autism, and congenital heart defects. These studies confirm
air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans which cause the above health
problems.
To address our concerns I request that the following actions are undertaken:
1. Due to the significant health concerns of the current project design, I request the department of planning
does not approve the project in it's current form.
2. I also request that alternative transport options to ease congestion on Pennant Hills Rd be considered such
as an orbital surface route
Mr and Mrs M Johnson
1 Mirrool St North Wahroonga 2076
carole dowd
Object
Carlingford , New South Wales
Message
The North Connex planning MUST be re-assessed. The health of affected residents is paramount..The fall-out from the stacks is potentially carcinogenic. The associated noise of traffic with construction will be intolerable & detrimental to health & well-being. This is sustained, long term aggravation, the consequences of which are well-known. Emissions on Pennant Hills Road may be the same as in the tunnel, but in the tunnel they are obviously more concentrated, having no air currents to disperse them.
huzan daver
Object
North Wahroonga , New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir/Madam

The North connex in its current form will be one of the nations longest road tunnels and one that will be used by more than 5,000 heavy diesel trucks daily and thousands of cars as well.

It is almost surreal that the advocates of this project propose having unfiltered ventilation stacks only at entry and exit and that do have one of these located in a quiet residential areas and within 1.5 km of densely populated suburbs such as Hornsby (including Westfield) and literally dozens of schools within this 1.5 km radius! In additions to many thousands of residents, almost 10,000 school children will be impacted by exhaust fumes on a daily basis.

No research has been done on the long or medium term impacts on human health as a result of having the concentrated exhaust fumes of 5,000 trucks flow directly onto the demographics listed above.

No studies have been conducted on the impact of a truck collision explosion occuring deep inside this tunnel - it is proposed that many of the 5,000 odd daily trucks would be tankers carrying highly inflamable petroleum or LPG or chemicals....

I therefore request that due to the significant health risks of this project that the department of planning does not approve this project in its current form.

I also request the alternative proposal of an orbital route be considered to ease congestion on Pennant Hills Road

Thank you

Dr Huzan Daver
11 Forrest Avenue
North Wahroonga NSW 2076
sherzan daver
Object
North Wahroonga , New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir/Madam

The North connex in its current form will be one of the nations longest road tunnels and one that will be used by more than 5,000 heavy diesel trucks daily and thousands of cars as well.

It is almost surreal that the advocates of this project propose having unfiltered ventilation stacks only at entry and exit and that do have one of these located in a quiet residential areas and within 1.5 km of densely populated suburbs such as Hornsby (including Westfield) and literally dozens of schools within this 1.5 km radius! In additions to many thousands of residents, almost 10,000 school children will be impacted by exhaust fumes on a daily basis.

No research has been done on the long or medium term impacts on human health as a result of having the concentrated exhaust fumes of 5,000 trucks flow directly onto the demographics listed above.

No studies have been conducted on the impact of a truck collision explosion occuring deep inside this tunnel - it is proposed that many of the 5,000 odd daily trucks would be tankers carrying highly inflamable petroleum or LPG or chemicals....

I therefore request that due to the significant health risks of this project that the department of planning does not approve this project in its current form.

I also request the alternative proposal of an orbital route be considered to ease congestion on Pennant Hills Road
THANK YOU

MS. SHERZAN DAVER
Beth Weldon
Comment
West Pennant Hills , New South Wales
Message
Filtration and local traffic
As a West Pennant hills valley resident i wish to express my extreme concern over the planned lack of filtration from the southern stack. and the fact the stack is located so close to residental properties. I am also concerned about the movement of 24/7 heavy vehicles through the proposed route during construction- these roads are already highly congested during morning and afternoon peak and adding so many heavy vehicles will add to the already significant delays . From experience the smallest traffic issue leads to further immense delays as the roads are only single lane and there is no other way around.
Danielle Jenkins
Object
West Pennant Hills , New South Wales
Message
I am a fit and healthy 18 year old and I object to you placing a stack in my backyard. I do not appreciate this and it is obvious no thought has been put into where you have decided to put the stack. I am not an engineer and have never held a full time job as I am still at school, but I know if I were designing new roads, I would never put something like this close to where people live. Are you unaware of the poisonous fumes, which all residents will be breathing in every day and night! The government is enforcing a new law for all parents to turn off their cars when picking up their children from school as the emissions from the cars are very dangerous for anyone, especially children to be breathing in.
If this is the case why are you placing something in my backyard that my sisters, neighbours and I are expected to live with and breathe in every day?
I will not have any ugly wall in my backyard ruining the natural scenery. I have parties here with my friends and I will be having my wedding reception at home with a marquee and there will not be any wall in that scenario!!
My 21st birthday which will be in 3 years time, will also be taking place in my beautiful backyard.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
My family and myself are very relaxed and like to be ourselves in our home. If anyone comes near my house I will call the police. This is my home, which my parents have been fixing up for us for many years. I will not be leaving home until I get married and the view of my backyard will NOT be changed what so ever!! I will not have my friends over with this XXXX going on, as it will look like a construction site. It will be very embarrassing and will lower the value of this home. Thousands of dollars have been put into renovating and will refuse to have my house looking like we live in a war zone. The fumes, which will be produced will leave traces of dirty markings and dust on our newly rendered house. Our home is very open and has bi-fold doors from our living room, opening up into the backyard. This is another entertaining area of the house where many guests socialize. My mother is a clean fanatic and if there is one bit of dust, dirt, mess or any form of marking on our house, out door dining table or inside the house she gets extremely upset as well as with everyone in the family. My mother is always onto my three sisters and myself on keeping the house tidy. She is always running around to try keep the house clean and having this XXXXXXX of a mess occurring in the backyard is not another chore to be keeping on top of!!
I strongly disagree with the plans on this production and suggest you find an alternative solution. I believe that the only reason for this to be occurring next to my home is because you do not want to spend any money on locating this elsewhere, as this is the cheapest option. You obviously do not care about where this is situated, as you will not be living with it for the rest of your life. This is what my neighbours, family and I will have to deal with!!!!!!!!!

I have photos of parties in my backyard as well as my friends and little sisters playing in the pool area which i would like to attach but it wont let me save it as a PDF file
Name Withheld
Object
Wahroonga , New South Wales
Message
I object to the project as detailed by NorthConnex.

I agree that there are significant benefits from having the tunnel, however I oppose the placement of the ventilation stack in a residential area when other areas are more suitable (and other options such as an orbital surface route have not been considered). The risks associated with the stack will not be properly known for some time and the EIS report bases its findings on flawed assumptions and hypothetical reasoning (which may not be borne out).

For a relatively minor increase in total project cost the stacks can either be spread over the length of the tunnel or placed in a more remote (non-residential) area. This is the preferable option.

It is upsetting that, if the future, it is found that these ventilation stacks do lead to an increased health risk, the damage would already be done.

I urge you to reject the project in its current form and, at least, require the placement of the ventilation stacks in a more remote area away from schools and residential areas.
Ming LU
Object
waitara , New South Wales
Message
Please find below my/our submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.

Firstly I/we would like to state we object to the project as described in the EIS.

I/We have a high level of concern regarding the following issues and request that these be considered by NorthConnex and the Department of Planning. In regards to the NorthConnex tunnel, I am concerned about:

1. Placement of the northern ventilation stack in the centre of a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga, where 9,300 school children will be exposed, as well as multiple aged care facilities, hospitals, businesses and homes.

2. The placement of the northern ventilation stack in a valley in Wahroonga where there are often low wind speeds, which will result in poor dispersion and exposure to community to high levels of tunnel emission.

3. I am highly concerned about the multiple large scale research studies that suggest the impacts of air pollutants on health are serious. These include increased death from heart disease, increased risks of lung cancer, stroke, poor lung growth in children, increased asthma, and recent research suggesting low birth weight for pregnant women, increased autism, and congenital heart defects. These studies confirm air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans which cause the above health problems.

4. I am concerned about the project including future provisions for portal emissions in densely populated areas, which will result in emissions remaining at ground level, and hence exposing the local population to pollutants. I am also concerned that NorthConnex's claim that there will no portal emissions from current proposal cannot be verified.

5. I am concerned about the large amount of diesel emissions which will be emitted from the NorthConnex tunnel, as it is being designed for heavy freight to bypass Pennant Hills Rd. Diesel emissions have been classified as carcinogenic by the World Health Organisation, and also contain a larger number of fine particles which penetrate deep into lung tissue and remain there causing inflammation.

6. I am concerned about the air quality within the tunnel which is shown in the EIS to have exceedences above standards for pollutants such as NO2, and haze from particulate matter at the ends of the tunnel.

7. I am concerned about the multiple flaws in the air quality modelling of the northern stack in the EIS. These include:
a) extrapolation of meteorological data from other weather stations which do not reflect the local meteorology, local topography, and the valley location.
b) The use of a coarse topographical model
c) The failure to consider polluted intake air from the Pennant Hills/M2 interchange as part of the project contribution to air quality at Wahroonga
d) the background air quality being based on air quality at Lindfield and Prospect and the lack of any actual data on PM2.5

8. I/we am concerned that a full and transparent options assessment process was not undertaken to assess alternative designs for the project. Unlike other tunnel projects in Sydney there are alternatives for locating the stack and portals in non-residential areas.

9. I am concerned that the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is cursory and unconvincing.

To address my/our concerns I request that the following actions are undertaken:

1. The air quality and human health impact assessment need to be revised to address the issues raised above.
2. An independent options assessment process should be undertaken to assess alternative locations for the ventilation stack and portals.
3. To undertake a Life Cycle Analysis and assessment for the provision of filtration
4. A long term health study on children and residents in areas impacted by stack discharges be included as part of the conditions of approval.
5. A comprehensive air quality monitoring program is developed and implemented.
6. An independent review of the ventilation system is undertaken to ensure that NorthConnex's claim of no portal emissions is justified.
7. Portal emissions from NorthConnex in the future are banned.
8. The Submissions Report/Preferred Project be exhibited to allow the community to respond to the revised information contained in the report.
9. The Department does not approve the project in its current form as it clearly does not meet the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development as required by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Ming Lu
Briony Castelnuovo
Object
Wollstonecraft , New South Wales
Message
I would like to state that I object to the project as described in the EIS.

I have a high level of concern regarding the following issues and request that these be considered by NorthConnex and the Department of Planning. In regards to the NorthConnex tunnel, I am concerned about:

Placement of the northern ventilation stack in the centre of a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga, where 9,300 school children will be exposed, as well as multiple aged care facilities, hospitals, businesses and homes.

The placement of the northern ventilation stack in a valley in Wahroonga where there are often low wind speeds, which will result in poor dispersion and exposure to community to high levels of tunnel emission.

I am highly concerned about the multiple large scale research studies that suggest the impacts of air pollutants on health are serious. These include increased death from heart disease, increased risks of lung cancer, stroke, poor lung growth in children, increased asthma, and recent research suggesting low birth weight for pregnant women, increased autism, and congenital heart defects. These studies confirm air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans which cause the above health problems.

I am concerned about the project including future provisions for portal emissions in densely populated areas, which will result in emissions remaining at ground level, and hence exposing the local population to pollutants. I am also concerned that NorthConnex's claim that there will no portal emissions from current proposal cannot be verified.

I am concerned about the large amount of diesel emissions which will be emitted from the NorthConnex tunnel, as it is being designed for heavy freight to bypass Pennant Hills Rd. Diesel emissions have been classified as carcinogenic by the World Health Organisation, and also contain a larger number of fine particles which penetrate deep into lung tissue and remain there causing inflammation.

I am concerned about the air quality within the tunnel which is shown in the EIS to have exceedences above standards for pollutants such as NO2, and haze from particulate matter at the ends of the tunnel.

I am concerned about the multiple flaws in the air quality modelling of the northern stack in the EIS. These include:
extrapolation of meteorological data from other weather stations which do not reflect the local meteorology, local topography, and the valley location.
The use of a coarse topographical model
The failure to consider polluted intake air from the Pennant Hills/M2 interchange as part of the project contribution to air quality at Wahroonga
the background air quality being based on air quality at Lindfield and Prospect and the lack of any actual data on PM2.5

I am concerned that a full and transparent options assessment process was not undertaken to assess alternative designs for the project. Unlike other tunnel projects in Sydney there are alternatives for locating the stack and portals in non-residential areas.

I am concerned that the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is cursory and unconvincing.

To address my concerns I request that the following actions are undertaken:

The air quality and human health impact assessment need to be revised to address the issues raised above.
An independent options assessment process should be undertaken to assess alternative locations for the ventilation stack and portals.
To undertake a Life Cycle Analysis and assessment for the provision of filtration
A long term health study on children and residents in areas impacted by stack discharges be included as part of the conditions of approval.
A comprehensive air quality monitoring program is developed and implemented.
An independent review of the ventilation system is undertaken to ensure that NorthConnex's claim of no portal emissions is justified.
Portal emissions from NorthConnex in the future are banned.
The Submissions Report/Preferred Project be exhibited to allow the community to respond to the revised information contained in the report.
The Department does not approve the project in its current form as it clearly does not meet the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development as required by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.
Karen Asthma sufferer
Object
West Pennant Hills , New South Wales
Message
Dear Sirs,

I OBJECT to many aspects of the proposed NORTHCONNEX M1 / M2 Tunnel Project (Application Number - SSI 13_6136) and set out my strongest objections below for your consideration.

1. As an asthma sufferer, I object to your proposal NOT to filter the ventilation stack. As I live in very close proximity to the stack, I expect my quality of life to deteriorate significantly in the presence of unfiltered exhaust from this very long tunnel spewing kilometres of captured exhaust which would normally have dissipated over a much larger area and is now to be concentrated and spewed over the residents of West Pennant Hills and Carlingford. What monetary compensation will you be offering to those whose health you compromise by disregarding our health concerns?

Not only will asthmatics like myself suffer, but the unfiltered carcinogens emitted by the stack risk the lives of everyone in our area. Carlingford and West Pennant Hills residents like myself already bear the burden of noise and chemical pollutants from the existing M2 and Pennant Hills Road thoroughfares. Further polluting our environment by avoiding your Duty of Care to use is heinous.

Solution: Provide filtration of the ventilation stacks in order to protect the health of local residents.

2. I object to the proposed route for workers trucks and other vehicles during the construction phase, which will bring already gridlocked peak hour traffic around Aiken, Oakes. Eaton and Karloon Roads. There are already some mornings where it takes me 25 mins just to get out of my suburb. The proposed additional traffic from your trucks as advised will mean I may be delayed in my journey to work by an hour or more. What compensation will you be offering me and others affected by the increased traffic when we are unable to get to work, and potentially lose our jobs?

Solution: Keep the heavy traffic out of quiet suburban streets and on Pennant Hills Road as much as possible.

3. I object to the poor planning and execution of this project that will see our house and land prices fall as a result. You propose to turn a green, leafy suburb into a giant construction zone. What compensation will you be offering when, through no fault of our own, our property values are wiped out?

Solution: Mitigate the visual and noise pollution to local residents to maintain property values and our quiet enjoyment of our suburb and take a Duty of Care by acknowledging residents' complaints.

These comprise my chief objections. I look forward to your honest consideration.
Name Withheld
Comment
West Pennant Hills , New South Wales
Message
As a resident of Gum Grove Place West Pennant Hills for 37 years I am very concerned about the southern ventilation stack on the Nothconnex project. This stack will be built very close to my home and there is no plan to filter this stack so pollution levels will be intolerable.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX I fear that this lack of filtering will XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX possibly lead to an earlier death. Not only does this stack need to be filtered but also moved away from the residential area. Thank you for considering this matter.

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSI-6136
Assessment Type
State Significant Infrastructure
Development Type
Road transport facilities
Local Government Areas
Hornsby Shire
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Minister
Last Modified By
SSI-6136-Mod-3
Last Modified On
18/12/2019

Contact Planner

Name
Dominic Crinnion