Skip to main content

State Significant Infrastructure

Determination

Western Harbour Tunnel & Warringah Freeway Upgrade

North Sydney

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

A new crossing of Sydney Harbour involving twin tunnels connecting WestConnex at Rozelle and the existing Warringah Freeway at North Sydney, and upgrade of the Warringah Freeway to connect with the Beaches Link and the Gore Hill Freeway Connection.

Consolidated Approval

Consolidated Conditions

Archive

Application (1)

SEARs (1)

EIS (73)

Response to Submissions (14)

Agency Advice (3)

Determination (6)

Approved Documents

Management Plans and Strategies (146)

Community Consultative Committees and Panels (5)

Reports (4)

Independent Reviews and Audits (6)

Notifications (1)

Other Documents (25)

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

Complaints

Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint

Enforcements

There are no enforcements for this project.

Inspections

There are no inspections for this project.

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

Submissions

Filters
Showing 21 - 40 of 1454 submissions
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I am a local resident of Cammeray and my children have attended local schools. I object to the Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade, on a number of grounds
1. the lack of transparency of the business case for the project- where is it and why haven't , we, the residents and tax payers been able to see this ? It's our 14 billion plus that's going to be spent and the lack of a business case raises suspicions of corrupt and unconscionable behaviour at worst or ineptitude at best. Neither are acceptable.
2. the flawed assumptions of the project - the public Do Not want more toll roads, congestion and air pollution, with the unfiltered stacks adding to pollution in the Sydney basin- especially in our summers, and when the bushfire seasons are starting in Aug. The Metro uptake has been so succesfull, why has this option not been considered ?
3. the lack of consideration of any other options other than a paid toll road. What about a Metro from Dee Why to Chatswood ? or a rail line ?
4. the location of air stacks near schools and child care centres. This unfiltered air will carry fine particulate vehicle emissions that will deposit in the lungs permanently!. This proposed tunnel - N Beaches 7.5km , 3 lanes each way, Cammeray to Seaforth and the W Harbour tunnel 7km 3 lanes each way, will produce 43.5 km of air pollution to Cammeray and North Sydney . The WHO deems there is no safe minimum level of particulates. FILTER the STACKS
5.given the lack of effort to compare this option to any others eg Metro - I object on the grounds that there will be zero benefits to any residents , whether they live in the N Beaches or anywhere along the route affected by the proposed project. Instead, it will be a minimum of 6 years of widespread disruption to road access and routes, major construction works, poorer air quality, health impacts on the young, elderly and immunocompromised, the loss of green space and amenity at Cammeray Golf Course and St Leonards park to name but 2 - increased congestion in local streets , and traffic jams in local streets when the tunnel users emerge onto local streets, the harbour dredging opens up contamination risks, major noise impacts in high density residential areas - especially those living close to the Warringah freeway who will have to endure night time road works, and the storage of dangerous goods
Proposal:
Scrap this plan and start again, and this time consider public transport options that DON'T involve a toll road or 6 years of misery for the benefit of a private company
What about a tram/Metro on the Eastern side of the Harbour bridge ? This would be more cost effective, decrease pollution and congestion and it can be retrofitted .
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object that we have had minimum time as a community to go through the vast mound of the EIS 9000 plus pages. We have been given from 29/1 /20 to 12/3/20, which is NOT enough time to understand what is being presented. Please extend this to June 2020, so the community has an opportunity to properly respond.
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the limited timeframe given for submissions and objections to the Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway EIS process. We had 5 months to look at the scoping document which was 90 pages long and we have been given 6 weeks to review thousands of pages of documents and details.
Carol Breislin
Object
WILLOUGHBY , New South Wales
Message
I have just found out about the EIS being released and it being 9000 pages! We are all busy people, I request, at least, an extension of another 2 months.
John Berry
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir/ Madam
I object to the short length of time that the EIS for the WHT is on public display and to the short length of time that I and other members of the public have been given to make a submission. Six weeks is patently insufficient to anaylise a 9,000 page technical document and to make an informed submission.
I feel that I and other members of the public are being denied procedural fairness. Therefore, I request that you grant me an extension of time in order to make a reasoned and informed submission.
Kind Regards
John Berry
Cammeray
CC: Gladys Berejiklian MP
Name Withheld
Object
CREMORNE , New South Wales
Message
I object to the public transport ie rail from northern beaches not having been assessed in EIS.
I object to the success of BLine and Metro not having been considered in EIS.
I object to unfiltered emissions being considered safe near homes and schools.
I object to sites close to homes and parks/sporting facilities being used for storage of potentially dangerous items.
I object to resulting Increased congestion in Cammeray and Neutral Bay .
I object to poor planning resulting in no access to bridge from Ernest street and subsequent rat running in local streets near homes and schools
,streets already compromised by poorly used bicycle lanes.
I object to lack of vision as to how to solve parking problems that will arise due to the project.
Name Withheld
Object
CROWS NEST , New South Wales
Message
I object to the timeframe within which we are able to review over 9000 pages, synthesise the information and make a considered, informed and educated objections or comments on this project. I work full time running a business and have a child at school. It is literally humanly impossible for a person in a similar situation (full time gainful employment and caring for a young child) to review the submission in the time allocated. I respectfully request an extension to at least 1 June 2020, which will provide enough time to review and submit any objections and comments.

Thanking you in advance for registering and responding to this objection.
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
BALMAIN , New South Wales
Message
Dear NSW Government,
Whilst I understand the possibility of a new harbour crossing may be needed, I disagree with the proposed best selected option for the western harbour project. The document proposes 4 crossing options stating pros and cons to each. Whilst the option closest to the eastern side of Balmain peninsular may have additional costs, the impact on heritage listed areas will be minimized compared to the favoured proposed route under montague street and entering the harbour at birchgrove. In the event the decision is to remain with the favoured option, I would suggest a repurchase of properties in the corridor and parkland above the proposed tunnel be developed. Consideration corning the impact of construction must be taken into account. The option to the east side of Balmain would have considerably less impact on core Balmain residential areas. There has not been any project involving roads or bridges that has come in at budget level or even close to budget level. The additional expense of purchasing properties in the corridor would be a tiny percentage of the additional over run budget that is always attributed to NSW government projects.
Kathy Husselbee
Object
WOLLSTONECRAFT , New South Wales
Message
Hello,
I firstly object to the length of time given assess the EIS for this major project. 900 pages cannot be technically assessed and consulted on in the short time frame given. This very long tunnel and road project will have major detrimental impact on thousands of Northern Sydney residents and school children who travel to the area.
I specifically object to having unfiltered air release stacks as part of the project for this length of tunnel and road. The real focus of this is to supposedly shorten travel times from the Northern Beaches to the detriment of air quality and parklands and heritage of Northern Sydney.
I generally object that light rail options for the Northern Beaches has not been analysed or costed in comparison to this huge and expensive project.
I do not support the imposition of a toll travelling north on the Harbour Bridge or using feeder roads to make sure a project like this makes any economic sense and to bolster the profits of large companies like Transurban.
I refer you to an episode of the television program 'Eutopia' where modelling for 'congestion busting' roads etc resulted in increased traffic over time. The money would be much better spent on less polluting public transport. This project is setting up a terrible ongoing legacy of lung cancer and heart disease for older residents, parents and tragically school children and those preschoolers attending early childhood centres.
Michael Tarlinton
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the fact that the EIS regards no filtration as appropriate for the proposed tunnel stack(s). How can there be such a blatant disregard for public health when it is a known fact that PM2.5 particles are small enough to get deep into and permanently stay in the lungs and enter the bloodstream? This situation is made more serious when the number of school children in close proximity (less than 1.5km) is considered. I urge the NSW Government to mandate appropriate filtering of the proposed tunnel stack(s).
Joanne Pollard
Object
NAREMBURN , New South Wales
Message
I object to this project due to the lack of time provided for community response to the EIS. I would request an extension of at least two months in order for the community to accurately assess the EIS and fully consider the impacts on our community and environment.
Joanne Pollard
Object
NAREMBURN , New South Wales
Message
I object to this project on the basis that the air quality in my area will be negatively impacted by the unfiltered ventilation stacks. In particular I am concerned about the impact of the unfiltered ventilation stacks being built in the proximity of the local schools. I have a child at Cammeray Public school and I would like a clear statement on how the air quality will be affected in the school area.
Joanne Pollard
Object
NAREMBURN , New South Wales
Message
Based on the EIS, there will be significant changes to the local traffic that will negatively impact local access to and from the Harbour Bridge and the Sydney CBD. I would like to see a proposal that allows for continued smooth and easy access to and from the Sydney CBD or alternative access with minimal impact on local traffic.
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the lack of time available to read the EIS documentation , attend meetings & make a submissions. Please extend the submission date by at least 4 weeks into March 2020.
Name Withheld
Support
ROSEVILLE , New South Wales
Message
Generally supportive. However expect to see in final proposal a significant uplift in proposed public transport and enhanced pedestrian and cycle options around the proposed extension included more dedicated bus lanes both in tunnel and on alternative routes such as Roseville Bridge and Millitary Road enhances pedestrian cycling and bus lane infrastructure
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the WHTBL proposal because the EIS confirms the poor air quality & negative health impacts on local people that live within close proximity (<200m) from the 240,000 vehicles per day traffic flows along the Warringah Expressway. Above EIS data. This baseline poor AQ, points is a legacy of past & current failures in the RMS, EPA, Health , Education & Planning departments within NSW. How can adding vehicle emissions from >30,000 VPD with the WHT & two major unfiltered ventilation not exacerbate poor air & negative health impacts on Cammeray residents? There are several vulnerable sites within <150m of the Warringah Expressway including Childcare centres , schools , etc that are already exposed to dangerous levels of vehicle emissions.

Is the air people breathe that currently live within 150m of the Warringah Expressway & proposed unfiltered stacks at Cammeray safe & healthy? Supply specific AQ measurements for near-road emission exposure levels. Will the air people breathe that live within 300m-500m of the two major unfiltered stacks at Cammeray & the people that live in close proximity (<150m) of the proposed expanded corridor post the construction be of a safe quality in terms of short & long term health impacts?

The EIS references ambient Sydney AQ changes of this project. This is a false measure of the total AQ & Health risk for the local people living within 150m of the vehicle emissions source from the Warringah Expressway & the WHTBL corridor & more specifically the Cammeray intersection with two large unfiltered stacks.

“Assessment of total exposures
Due in large part to the existing levels of PM2.5 in air within the existing urban environment, the
maximum total concentrations of PM2.5 are above the guidelines for both a 24-hour average and
the annual average (including the 2025 goal by NEPC (2016)) with or without the operation of the
project. These elevated background levels would be present in the community regardless of the
construction and operation of the project” – WHT EIS Page 13-16
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the WHTBL proposal due to the loss of valuable inner city green space & bushland generally, but specifically to the impact on the Cammeray Golf Club. The construction stage is a major concern but the permanent loss of 30%-40% of the golf course to build & operate RMS/ Tunnel workshops is a disgrace. It's doing things on the cheap & nasty , the WHTBL project should require the purchase of alternative non-green space community land to build a tunnel truck workshop & parking space. Its stealing greenspace.

The land grab will reduce the size , functionality of the 9 hole course & it's ongoing viability. The course was already cut in half in the 60's to build the Warringah Expressway. It reduces the green buffer between the expressway & residential area in Cammeray. A bus lane on the expressway was recently added which sliced a valuable part of the golf course away. Local people play golf , walk dogs, etc at night on this course. It also has many large & established trees which are a delight to view & provide noise protection.

The purpose of preserving inner city green space was not to keep it for future RMS projects being done on the cheap. It is also at odds with the NSW gov policy to protect Greenspace announced last year.
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the WHTBL proposal due to the negative impacts on local residents due to the construction activity. The West connex construction activity was & is currently highly stressful on local residents. The WHTBL impacts will be even worse around the Warringah Expressway , Cammeray site.

Night construction activity using heavy equipment , trucks , etc will generate unacceptable noise , dust & activity along the expressway. I understand it will start at 10pm & continue to 4pm most days of the week , for >5 years considering the WHT & BL projects will overlap & extend out.

Additionally, the disruption to the Warringah Expressway the busiest expressway in Australia carrying 240,000 vpd will be considerable for the >5 year construction period. A part, from the extra noise, slower traffic flows , increase vehicle emissions from then 240,000 vpd many vehicles on the expressway it will encourage rat-runs through Cammeray & other suburbs as drivers try to avoid delays from the construction work.

Any minor construction problem over the 5 year construction period will have major impacts on the 240,000 vpd & exacerbate noise, pollution, traffic problems on local residents. This will increase the day & night disruption, increase stress & negative health impacts on the local residents.

Building the WHTBL on top of the Warringah Expressway is a highly risky construction project which will unfairly impact on the health of local people in the lower north shore & expressway users for over 5 years. These large negative impacts are highly predictable & not given sufficient weighting in the EIS.
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the air quality & health impact assumptions, framework & conclusions in the EIS.

The AQ assessment assumes highly efficient Euro 6 engine standards in predicted WHTBL emissions levels. Euro 6 regulations were blocked back in 2015.
Recent TER research stated that Australia fleet vehicle emissions have actually increased in the last few years due to longer trips & the sale of large SUVs.
The TER research stated that there is little reliable data about actual or real world Australia fleet emissions. What data did the RMS use ?

The EIS AQ assessment refers to EPA ambient/background Sydney AQ changes in relation to assessing the incremental impact of the WHTBL . Ambient AQ does not measure the real risk from poor AQ on people that live in close proximity ( <150m ) to the current Warringah Expressway or those directly impacted by the WHTBL proposal in term of by total air pollution exposures.

The EIS uses a dubious method of calculating AQ & Health impacts by taking Do Nothing, less Do Something, plus Ambient AQ to calculate the incremental AQ & health impact. It seems to exclude emissions from the 240,000 vpd that already use the Warringah Expressway or ignore past failures of the RMS building & operating the Warringah Expressway.

The EIS Health section states that local PM10,PM2.5 levels on the Expressway currently exceed daily & annual healthy limits. It then states that vehicle emissions from the two unfiltered stacks would be insignificant given existing local emissions & that incrementally the project would not have an additional AQ or Health impact. These assessed impacts are based on the above dubious assumptions. How , does the EIS justify this approach?

No where does the EIS directly assess near-road current or future AQ or health impacts. Is the air young children, school children & local residents actually breathe , that live within 150-300m of this traffic corridor safe or not? Do you have specific Air Monitor Station readings & independent long term health assessment for these people. Can you share this AQ data?
In short , the AQ & Health impact assessment points to existing AQ problems in the Lower North shore, excludes 240,000 vpd emissions, continues to ignore the people at greatest risk with significantly higher close proximity exposure , also use some dubious models & critical assumptions. This AQ approach seems a standard RMS & NSW Critical Infrastructure tactic to get projects approved. Can the EPA or RMS provide independent AQ & Health impact assessments of near-road sites at greatest risk from earlier RMS competed projects?

These AQ & Health impacts probably exist across the NSW road network where local people living within 150m of roads with >50,000 vpd traffic flows. Where is the independent research & health assessment of NSW schools, long day care centre , etc ?
Name Withheld
Object
CAMMERAY , New South Wales
Message
I object to the proposal because of the current AQ risks from the Warringah Expressway ( <100m away) & increased emissions from the proposed two large unfiltered stacks (<250m away) from the Anzac Park Public School at Cammeray. Attached is a California EPA Schools Handbook dealing with near-road air quality & health impacts (2015). It states that no new school school be located within 500' (151m) of a major traffic flow with > 50,000 vehicle per day. The Warringah Expressway currently carries 250,000 vpd & there will be a doubling of vehicle emissions from two adjacent unfiltered stacks. ( Estimate- 50% of 6 kms tunnel length x 6 lanes x 100% of all tunnel vehicle emissions). What difference is there on children's lungs & health from excessive vehicle emissions that go to an existing school or a new school?

Can the NSW RMS , EPA , Health & Education departments provide in-school AQ readings & health impact assessments across Sydney for all schools & child care centres that are located <150m of major roadways carrying >50,000 -100,000 vpd? Clearly , this near-road AQ issues is not considered properly by the RMS with the EIS WHTBL assessment or more generally across NSW. How many kids attend schools that are directly exposed to dangerous levels of vehicle emissions?

Can the RMS make public detailed air quality readings & health risk assessment for people living within 150m of the current Warringah Expressway & proposed WHTBL unfiltered stacks emissions predictions on people <500m. This includes several major schools.
Attachments

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSI-8863
Assessment Type
State Significant Infrastructure
Development Type
Road transport facilities
Local Government Areas
North Sydney
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Minister
Last Modified By
SSI-8863-Mod-2
Last Modified On
27/01/2024

Contact Planner

Name
Daniel Gorgioski