Western Harbour Tunnel & Warringah Freeway Upgrade

I object due to the project on the basis of the current design of the exhaust stacks. ***Exhaust stacks need to be constructed so that air being released into the atmosphere is released at standard of "VERY GOOD" levels as set by department of Planning, Industry & Environment of the NSW Government in its Air Quality Index***. Air needs to be released at this standard due to the high concentration of population in close proximity to the exhaust stacks (especially 0-18 year olds at schools and other education facilities within hundreds of meters within the exhaust stacks). As a community, where it is in our power to do so, we need to avoid further pressure on our respiratory systems and minimise the social, emotional and financial cost that compromise health brings in both the immediate and longer term. Thank you.

I am a Northbridge resident whose family will be adversely affected in many ways by this project while at the same time benefiting in now way whatsoever.
I object to this proposed project for the following reasons:
it is an emissions creating project at a time when we should be trying to reduce carbon emissions
The potential damage to our green open spaces, world-famous Middle Harbour waterways and the destruction of biodiverse-rich and much-treasured remnant bushland. This project will remove green spaces close to a quickly expanding city. These spaces are the lungs of our city. Our local bushland Flat Rock Gully, with its flora and fauna and wonderful bush walk will be destroyed. The unknown effect of the dredging of our Harbour waterways is a massive concern for all Sydney . Of particular concern for the residents of the Willoughby area is the prediction that our precious Northbridge Baths will become unsafe to use.
Like most residents, the impacts of the car tunnel projects on air quality around our streets is a great concern
It is so wrong that it is proposed to have unfiltered emission stacks near child-care centres and schools. We certainly don't want our children and I don't want my grandchildren being forced to stay indoors at recess and lunch because of dangerous air pollution levels as happened during the recent bushfires.. certainly not an acceptable educational experience to have to watch TV or play board games inside instead of running around outside
As an alternative, NSW Government should investigate more environmentally sensitive and efficient public transport options linking Chatswood and northern beaches hubs. This makes sense when we look at recent statistics which show a huge rise in the number of people using the Sydney public transport system.

To the Minister for Roads

The Western Harbour Tunnel (WHT) is a plan to put more cars on the road at a time when the need to cater for so many cars into the future is questionable. The WHT is also intended to prop up the WestConnex project and will have the effect of increasing pollution across our city. Furthermore, 10 years after finally receiving positive reports on the quality of the water in Sydney Harbour, the WHT will disturb the seabed and release toxic pollutants.

Our community doesn’t want massive negative impacts on our local area for the next four years. And although the WHT is not scheduled to start until 2021, the impacts of the new infrastructure to tunnel from the Iron Cove Bridge through to the Anzac Bridge are already being seen and felt on the Balmain Peninsula. Global experience of major toll-road projects has demonstrated conclusively that projects like the Western Harbour Tunnel encourage more car use when the case for a decline in car use in the next ten years has been made by academics overseas. Even though you predict to fill the tunnel with the increased road capacity it creates, the Cross City Tunnel experience suggests that this is unlikely to occur. The government needs to invest in 21st century public transport, not another toll-road which generates pollution for which there is no compelling business case.

A casting plant on White Bay will bring construction noise and vibrations for up to 12 hours per day - the noise will potentially be so overwhelming that some residents will have to be ‘bought out’ by government. In addition, the Balmain Leagues Club site will be used as the primary Southern tunnelling location, where spoil will be pulled up from the ground and removed via trucks. You may think you are only going to inconvenience residents for four years, but you are assuring the death-knell of a community club in the inner west. No investor in the Club and redevelopment of the Club site would be likely yo wait that long to re-establish.

Cofferdams will be constructed off Yurulbin Point so that large pre-cast concrete road tunnel sections can be barged from White Bay and built into the trench. This will force the temporary relocation of the Birchgrove Ferry Wharf. Yurulbin Park will become a construction site while the south side of the tunnel is bored under Louisa Road. Spoil will be taken up at Yurulbin Point and shipped away. The project will dredge toxic sediment, contaminating harbour waters and threatening native sea life. Apart from the enforced narrowing of the Parramatta River for 4 years, the environmental damage that you may cause should there be anything unforeseen occur would be terribly damaging reputationally: to the environment, to Sydney and to the Government.

Our community doesn’t need this polluting toll-road. The government needs to go back to the drawing board and rethink this proposal. If it can find no alternative to the Western Harbour Tunnel, then choose a more beneficial route and please do not dig up the toxic sludge which has finally settled: continue the tunnelling from Balmain to Ball’s Head underground, rather than in a trench.

We live at 1 Whaling Road, next to the High Street interchange.
Refer attachment:
* High Street North Pedestrian Crossing
* Whaling Road Park - Tree replacement and Privacy
* Stormwater impact

I strongly object to the proposed Western Harbour Tunnel & Warringah Freeway Upgrade.

I live just metres from the freeway and am extremely concerned about the effect of the unfiltered ventilation shaft/ smoke stacks on the future health of myself, my family and my neighbours. From the research I've done, I have learnt that these unfiltered shafts simply extract, condense and then disperse road pollution to local areas and it's wholly unacceptable to claim, as the EIS does, that there will be no ill-effects or pollution created by the ones being built in Cammeray and other areas. Other countries filter their ventilation shafts, so why can't we? It is a false economy to not follow best practice and filter them.

I am also extremely concerned about the increase in noise and road usage by heavy vehicles during construction, which I believe will continue for at least four and a half years. I am incredibly worried about the constant back and forth of trucks, and have huge concerns about the safety of myself, my children, the students attending nearby Anzac Public school as well as other pedestrians. Both my children will be attending Cammeraygal High School by the time the build starts and will be faced with crossing even busier, even more unsafe roads to get to school.

We already have significant noise on our street from the freeway. Drilling and building the tunnels and support structures at the Golf Course will massively affect our sleep, concentration, stress levels and physical and mental health. Our children's wellbeing and educational outcomes will most likely be massively and negatively impacted from being constantly disturbed day and night.

Residents such as myself have watched Sydney-siders in other parts of the city have their lives - and homes - affected hugely by the building of tunnels and I cannot understand how planners appear to be ignoring the pleas of locals to reconsider this build. There are far more pressing projects to fund and at a time when we are facing so many ecological problems, it's simply arrogant to focus attention and much-needed tax-payer dollars on non-sustainable transport options that have so many negatives and barely any positives.

I object to this proposal because the proposers deliberately refused to consider public transport, especially some form of rail, as an option for the routes. The resultant addition of massive streams of road vehicles to an already over-crowded city flies in the face of the scientifically-shown need to drastically reduce emissions in order to retard or stop climate change. One obvious alternative would be a form of light rail from the northern beaches to Chatswood, with links there to heavy rail and metro lines.

1. Unfiltered stacks in a heavily built up area are an outrage as our Premier Berejeklian said herself when in opposition.
Pollution must be monitored before this project is attempted, stacks must be filtered and warnings must be given on high pollution days to all residents.
2. We should attend to our rail networks not create more truck pollution. Fancy a Sydney Melbourne train having to go at 15kph because of lack of track maintenance in this day and age when you are spending billions on an unnecessary tunnel? Now 2 people killed. We are third world standard.
3. Trains not cars - there will be deadlock.
4. A 50 metre zone for building damage from tunneling is 1/6 of the Westconnex 300 metre zone. I was told by Westconnex employees that this project is avoiding the dreadful mistakes made by the previous Haberfield fiasco. How can they reduce their responsibility by such a huge margin? How do we assess our property in time to be considered affected by this unnecessary project?

I object strongly to this proposal because it will massively increase emissions of pollutants, made worse by the fact that the Federal government has refused to apply the best international standards of emissions from vehicles. I also object to the proposed siting of exhaust stacks very close to many schools in North Sydney and Willoughby and beyond. This threatens the health of children, whose constitution is more vulnerable, and of older residents and therefore will create expensive health problems for years to come. If the worst happens and the tunnels are built, they should be closed whenever air quality is reduced by smoke, whether from factory fires or bushfires.

I object to this proposal in part because it would take over many areas of important public land, in some cases permanently [e.g. part of St Leonards Park] and in others for many years during construction. One such area is near the top of Flat Rock Creek in Willoughby - it has been carefully nurtured over decades and is a highly-valued local amenity for exercise, whether walking, running or dog-walking. It is home to diverse wildlife which would not survive the excavations, noise, dust and massive movements of trucks. It is almost certain that residents' health will deteriorate with the loss of the amenity and the noise and pollution during construction. Thereafter, for the foreseeable future emissions from unfiltered exhaust stacks will add insult to injury.

After discussion by members of the Executive Committee of the Owners Corporation of SP 30686, we have concerns/objections with three aspects of the proposed design and the way they impact our owners and/or occupants at 12 – 14 Merlin St, Neutral Bay. These concerns/objections are :
• Construction work for the proposed removal of the cycleway and pedestrian access and under road connection of northern and southern pedestrian/cycle pathways along Falcon St. This is to increase the number of freeway lanes below that area by excavating the rock along the eastern side of that freeway. This excavation will have our building many metres closer to the edge of that freeway cutting (we note the extent of the underground/basement car park for the building in particular) and we wish to know what method of construction will be employed for that excavation and what guarantees you provide for no damage to our building during construction. Would you confirm that prior to commencement, you will undertake and provide (at your expense) a photographic and written engineering report of the condition of this building and of any existing cracks or deformations to ensure any worsening of such during construction will be rectified by your contractors.
• We note with dismay that your ‘radical’ plan for traffic flow across the Falcon St overpass has been designed so as to exclude any west bound (LH turn) traffic from our street (Merlin St). This effectively removes our normal access to all such things as the North Sydney Council offices; the North Sydney CBD; the North Sydney library; all shops and businesses in (adjacent) Crows Nest; the Royal North Shore Hospital; the Mater Hospital; sporting facilities, shops and businesses in Cammeray and Northbridge; the north bound access ramp to the existing freeway/Lane Cove tunnel/M2-M7 motorways, as well as an uncomplicated approach by some of our owners to family located in the nearby suburbs mentioned above.
Hopefully, the predicament can be overcome by shortening the median strip between westbound lanes 4 & 5 to enable a normal LH turn and sequencing the traffic lights at the eastern side of the Merlin St intersection so as to not have a build up of westbound Falcon St traffic in the intersection at some light changes (in the same way as at present on the western end of the Falcon St overpass so as to not block northbound off ramp traffic by the west bound Falcon St traffic at some light changes)
We object to the alternative westbound egress from Merlin St that you propose - to exit towards the EAST, take the slip lane beside the art gallery and try to enter the west bound traffic flow of Military Rd. This is unsafe, particularly for vans and trucks – due to obstructed vision over the driver’s left shoulder – and for people towing, as is the case of three owners in this building.
• Thirdly, most owners and occupiers of our building when southbound on the freeway take the North Sydney exit (thus avoiding the dangerous slip lane if taking the Falcon St off ramp) and utilize the ‘hook turn’ at the bottom of the off ramp hill into Alfred St Nth. We object to the intention to remove that option with the new design and hence force us (and all other residents and delivery vans/trucks) to use either the dangerous slip lane or the longer route into heavy traffic adjacent to the North Sydney CBD. It is disappointing that a good infrastructure engineer was not able to design a better interaction of bus and car lanes to enable the current option to remain albeit with maybe slight modification.

- Object to project in its entirety; a train line should be built. Please see the following articles:
- Traffic Forecasts Ignoring Induced Demand: a Shaky Fundament for Cost-Benefit Analyses, 2012, European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research;
- Generated Traffic: Implications for Transport Planning, 2001, ITE Journal;
- Induced Demand and Rebound Effects in Road Transport, 2010, University of California;
- Do more roads really mean less congestion for commuters?, Sydney Business Insights, Matthew Beck, 2017
- Congestion and Reliability Review: Full Report, Austroads, 2016, page 18

- Object to any construction/operations resulting in noise >80 dBa overnight (EIS Chapter 10 page 5 indicates 80 dBa to be "loud")

- Object to unfiltered smoke stacks
- World Health Organization: Outdoor Air Pollution Causes Cancer, American Cancer Society, 2013
- How can air pollution cause cancer?, Cancer Research UK, 2019
- Environmental Causes > Proven Risk - Carcinogen, Cancer Council Australia, 2017

- Object to workers parking outside worksite car parks (e.g. bottom section of Morden Street in Cammeray does not have parking restrictions; this should be to the benefit of local residents, not workers who will have access to a car park in the Cammeray Golf Course site)

On the overall project, I cannot understand why a public transport option was not evaluated alongside this proposal. We are presented with a single option, no alternatives, no value assessment. After spending all this money, my understanding is that in around 8 years, induced demand will result in this new crossing becoming clogged, and therefore no better than the existing bridge. What a waste of effort.

On the air quality;
- The EIS material presented at Balmain Town Hall showed a yearly average background pollution level, with minor improvements where traffic is being removed, and degradation in areas where new traffic is being added (eg Rozelle). However, what is important (particularly to asthma sufferers) is not the average but the peak levels. Using an annual average simply smooths out and hides possible detrimental changes to air quality.
- The EIS material shows how stacks work to disperse pollution. However the examples given in TP05 all show the effect on flat ground. The stacks in Rozelle will be in a hollow, and therefore the examples given do not represent reality. What will be effects given the topography?
- Given that various studies have produced different results on the effects of stack pollution (Lane Cove vs M5), why not reduce the possible effects by making the stacks cleaner by implementing scrubbing technology. Or at least allowing newer generation scrubbers to be implemented when less energy-intensive technology has been developed.

On the proposed route:
- After the level of changes made to the Rozelle interchange between EIS and tender, what certainty do we have that the proposed route for the tunnel through Balmain will be adhered to? Or is the proposed route simply an artist's impression and the final route will be decided once tenders have been received?

On construction damage:
- The typically 100 years old or more houses in Balmain are far more susceptible to damage than newer slab-based designs. Vibration and settlement risks are more likely to inflict significant damage than in newer areas.
- Tunnel depth has a lot to do with vibrations; both in construction and tunnel operation. My understanding is that on WestConnex M4 extension, sections of the tunnel were dug far closer to the surface than the original EIS proposed. How can we guarantee that minimum depths will be required of the contractor, or can they simply choose to do their own thing?
- If the State Government's own EIS suggests that damage is reduced for tunnels deeper than 30 metres, then why not require that the tunnels are at least 30 metres FROM THE SURFACE TO THE TOP OF THE TUNNEL, NOT THE FLOOR OF THE TUNNEL AS SHOWN IN YOUR PLANS?
- Why is the 50 metre damage zone arrangement being continued? Other states have far larger damage zones (Victoria has 250 metres?) Given the age of the houses, you must extend the distance. Again, evidence of subsidence on M4 extension extends up to 300 metres.
- The damage remediation process appears to rely on the contractor's discretion. I understand the M4 Extension contractor has rejected all claims from the tunnelling of the M4 extension. There must be a totally independent process to ensure integrity.

On the materials extracted from the harbour crossing:
- I understand that nearly 900,000 cubic metres of spoil and 142,000 cubic metres of toxic waste will be removed from the harbour crossing. The toxic stuff is so bad that it can't be disposed at sea (unlike Sydney's untreated sewage which is dumped offshore). This gives a sense of bad this stuff is. Given that it will be excavated in a narrow tidal race, nothing I had heard or seen convinces me that this will not cause massive pollution within the harbour.

I am against several issues in the EIS.

I am concerned about what will happen if tunnel passes under, or near my house. It seems we are about 50m from the tunnel according to the EIS. I would like to receive assurance that we will be looked after if our home is damaged because of this project. We don't want to have to fight for it, hire lawyers and pay for expensive reports - which is what seems to be happening to other people above current tunnel projects. The distance of the zone of influence should be increased - 50m sounds too short, and I understand 250m is used by other states and/or on other projects. Also, ensure that there is community representation on the independent panel assessing the damage claims.

I understand that more than 7 hectares of vegetation will be removed for the project. After having witnessed recent large-scale tree destruction around the Rozelle rail yards area to make way for the construction of the Rozelle Interchange, I strongly oppose removal of mature trees. It does not matter if they are later replaced by new trees. A young tree is not the same as a mature tree.

The idea that the Yurulbin Park can be completely dug up, then somehow 'rebuilt' to be in line with the original design misses the point - the park is not valuable to the community because of how Bruce Mackenzie designed is in 1972. It is valuable to the community because it has been there for more than 40 years. People have memories associated with that place. I suggest that the person who came up with this idea has their house knocked down, waits for a couple of years, then has it rebuilt according to the original design, and see how they like it. Destroying the park, then 'recreating' it is wrong. Period.

I object to the project because of the significant increase in local traffic where I live and the increase in Ernest St traffic past Anzac Park Public School. There is nothing to be gained for the residents of Cremorne and we would be better off with the original design where the Ernest St ramps were removed completely.

The current proposal increases the use of rat runs and loops, not only for residents but also for construction

I object to not only the timing of the release (just when 10,000 children are returning to school in my area) but also the length of time given to read, understand and consider the life changing impacts of this project with a 12 March 2020 deadline. Indeed the devil is in the detail of over 9,000 plus pages of documents and overly wordy text.

I object to the singular allowance for road only vehicles (especially diesel with nitrogen oxide and heavy vehicles) that this project continues to proceed with, no matter what feedback is given and how damaging this is to human health in densely populated areas. North Sydney increases in daily population by approximately 60,000 CBD workers with the Warringah Fwy right next to them, with an additional 10,000 school and childcare students also attending this construction and permanently increased pollution zone (air, noise and during 5 plus years of construction dust most of which contains silica which is highly damaging to lungs due to the high content of sandstone under our top layer of land).

This project will directly impact my local area in a very negative way and for an extremely long period of time.
It appears that these plans were made based on incorrect assumptions and without any comparison to similar funding of public transport options
Public transport options should be the priority, as more roads simply leads to more vehicles and any capacity will be quickly exhausted.
The plan to put in a trench rather than tunneling under the harbour is a terrible idea and will impact the harbour environment and wild-life. It will also necessitate the transport and treatment of the waste from the harbour floor.
The depth of the tunneling under homes appears to be unclear, and from the WestConnex experience, the current zone of influence is totally insufficient to cover damage to homes. Local independent representatives must have a say in any assessment of damage.
Any plans must include filters on exhaust stacks. Why are we putting peoples health at risk by not doing this by default? We appear to be behind the rest of the world in recognising and addressing these issues.

Whilst cooking dinner tonight my 8yo who goes to Cammeray Public school and hopes to go to High School in North Sydney near where I work started drawing her submission in 3 parts which I can't upload (as it's not a PDF which is ridiculous) but I can illustrate in words.
part 1.before - two green hills with the setting sun behind them, a big pink tree and a big green tree on top of the hills, two happy people (my daughter and her dad my husband) with golf clubs, holes with flags numbered 4, 5 and 6 with a duck in between.
part 2.after - black and white, two toilet blocks 'b' and 'g', two banks of lights, a stack with smoke coming out of it and a wide road a large truck, time 9.00pm
part 3. No No Tunnel No we don't wont the tunnel

This project has now entered all parts of our life and will be life changing for my 8yo, she will have noise, dust, high voltage lights turning night into day when she should be sleeping and pollution 24/7 for years at home, at school and can't do a very special thing, spending time exercising outside in a safe green space. With precious time spent with her dad playing golf just over the fence at Cammeray twice a week, tennis once a week after school learning a new game in a lovely environment with ducks living at the dam right next to the Warringah fwy but they feel safe with plenty of trees and grass around them. An innocent pleasure to be taken from her by greed and ill-conceived progress which seeks to ruin an innocent childhood (though even at her age she can out putt her dad and godfather on the green much to their pride). Cammeray Golf Course is a very important place for all age groups, animals and birds and is the green buffer we still have to trade off with the busy, noisy densely populated area elsewhere that we are not going to give up on forever!

I object to the extra pollution fro, the project in an already highly polluted area. Extra health risks for Anzac Park Public School and Cammeray Public School are unacceptable

1. Traffic.
Local traffic get worse at there are less access points to the express way network and it takes longer to get there.
2. Pollution
Things are going to get worse in an already polluted area.
- the stacks are unfiltered
-negative health impact to schools around the project
-Noise levels are allowed to double during construction before anything needs to be done.
-level of noise after construction will be higher in an area that it is already highly noisy. Acoustic screen for facilities not enough to contain noise.
3. Green spaces is already limited.
-Loss of 3 hectares in Cammeray
-Waste recycle lake is lost. Not a real proposal to replace it.
-Opportunity to cover sheds at Gold Course have a green roof between Ernerst st and Falcon st. not considered.