NorthConnex

Please find below my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex and comments on "Community update 5 (September 2014)

I support the project in principle, however I object to the project as described in the EIS.

I am deeply concerned about the following issues and request that my concerns be considered by the Department of Planning and the NorthConnex.

With regards to the tunnels, I am concerned about:

1. The lack of height and placement of Northern ventilation stack in the centre of a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga.

2. Wahroonga and surrounding areas will be exposed to varying concentrations of exhaust fumes coming from the stack and the portal without consideration to wind direction and weather inversion in the valley.

3. There are a large number of school children who will be exposed to these concentration of fumes. There are also a large number of elderly and immune suppressed persons in multiple aged care facilities, hospitals and homes.

4. There have been multiple large scale research studies that suggest the impacts of air pollution on health are serious and long term. These include increased risks of lung problems, risks of lung cancer, stroke, poor lung growth in children, asthma and death from heart disease.

5. Recent research is suggesting the risk of low birth weight of children due to affected pregnant women, increased risk of congenital heart defects and increased risk of autism. These studies have confirmed that air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans which cause the above health problems.

6. The project and any future provisions for portal emissions in densely populated areas is of great concern. Any portal emissions can occur as a result of wind direction into the entrance of the tunnel, the speed of vehicles. This will increase the amount of polluted air through the tunnel and the extraction fans will not be designed and commissioned for this event. These polluting emissions will remain at ground level and spread around the populated area and hence exposing the local population to these pollutants. NorthConnex's claim that there will be no portal emissions from the current proposal have not be verified as not all possible conditions have been investigated.

7. There will be a large amount of diesel fuel emissions emitting into the tunnel due to the freight trucks bypassing Pennant Hills road. Pennant Hills road is open to the atmosphere along its full length and hence the emissions will disperse along its full length. The tunnel however is collecting the emissions along its full length of 9 km and the fumes are being pushed along the tunnel by "Jet Fans" at ceiling level. These emissions are being increasingly concentrated along its length and then partially being exhausted through the stack and the remainder will be emitted out of the portal. Also more and more vehicle are being converted to diesel fuel in lieu of petrol and this will increase the diesel fuel emission in the tunnel.

8. Diesel fuel emissions are classified carcinogenic by the WHO. Diesel fuel emissions contain a larger number of fine particles that can penetrate deep into the lung tissue and remain there causing inflammation.

9. The air quality within the tunnels is shown in the EIS to exceed the standards for pollutants, such as NO2, and haze from particulate matter towards the end of the tunnel. If there is a traffic hold up or the traffic is slow (due to a breakdown in the tunnel or further along the expressway), the fuel emissions into the tunnel will increase even further.

10. There are multiple inconsistencies in the air quality monitoring and modelling of he northern stack in the EIS. These include:

i) the failure to consider pollutants taking into the intake portal from the Pennants Hills/M2 interchange as part of the air quality at Wahroonga.
ii) the background air quality being based on air quality at Lindfield and Prospect and the lack of any actual data on PM2.5.

iii) the use of a coarse topographical model.

iv) extrapolation of meteorological data from other weather stations. These do not reflect the local meteorology. Little consideration appears to have been given to the local topography and the orientation of the valley including prevailing wind conditions. These would indicate that if the stack is not high enough above the ridges the plume will be directed toward the ground or if no wind exists the plume will drop to the ground.

v) the apparent lack of consideration in the event there is a fire in the tunnel, particularly at the entrance to the tunnel and the resultant pollutants emitting from the fire being pushed along the tunnel by the "jet fans" and the effect this has on the persons within the tunnel.

11. a full and transparent options assessment process was not undertaken to assess alternative designs for the project. Unlike other tunnel projects in the greater Sydney metropolitan area there were alternatives for locating the stack(s) and portals in non-residential areas.

12. the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is not convincing and lacks prove. Mentioning other tunnel projects to demonstrate no need for filtration is irrelevant to this tunnel as this tunnel is the longest at 9 km and the collection of emissions along the full length provides a different concentration level than for shorter tunnels.

13. I strongly object to a comparison being made by NorthConnex in the Community update 5 with "wood fired heaters in the Sydney Basin ..accounting for more than 50 % of particulate matter" to support the project. This refers to the whole of the Greater Metropolitan Area and not to a concentrated location such as the exhaust stack.

14. I strongly object to a statement made by NorthConnex in the Community update 5 that "Road tunnels and ventilation outlets do not generate pollution: vehicles using both surface roads and tunnels are the cause of the emissions, ...". What NorthConex appears to be misunderstanding is that the tunnels and the stacks are concentrating emissions from vehicles using the tunnels and the surface road vehicles are not the cause of the emissions from the tunnels and the stacks.


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

a) An independent options assessment process be undertaken to assess alternative locations for the ventilation stack and portals such as some 1 km further North.
b) An independent review of the ventilation system is undertaken to ensure that NorthConnex's claim for no portal emissions is justified.
c) An independent review be undertaken to consider intermediate exhaust system stacks to alleviate concentration levels and smoke exhausting in case of a fire in the tunnels.
d) To undertake a life cycle analysis and assessment for the provision of filtration.
e) The air quality and human health impact assessment be revised to address the issues raised above.
f) A comprehensive air quality air quality monitoring program be developed, implemented and maintained.
g) Portal emissions from the tunnels be eliminated by control of the exhaust fans.
h) A long term health study on children and adults in the areas impacted by the stack and portal discharges be included as part of the conditions of approval.
i) The Submission Report/Preferred Project be exhibited to allow the community to respond to the revised information contained in the report.
j) The Department of Planning and Environment 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.
k) That the EIS includes the intention of local traffic management in and around the work sites to limit the current congestion in some of the local street.
l) That the tunnel construction be reconsidered for four lanes each way to take into consideration the intention to construct a container wharf in Newcastle thus considerable increasing freight traffic on the M1.
m) That NorthConnex cease supporting their case for the project with irrelevant and non supporting information.

Please Find Below my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.

I object the current design of the Northconnex project as described in the EIS.

I am concerned about the proposed location of the northern pollution stack for the Northconnex tunnel. So much evidence is available today that tells a much different story to what is being presented to the community via constant leaflets from Northconnex.

It has been proven that the stack will be in very close proximity to a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga. Where 9,300 school children (including myself), aged care facilities, hospitals and the general public will be exposed to toxic air pollutants which have been proven to have detrimental impact to health.

It has been suggested by multiple large scale studies that the effects on health of such exposure are detrimental. Increasing 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.

In summary, it has been made very clear by the Northconnex team, that the health implications on the local residents are negligible, and that their air quality modelling has been extensive and thorough. However upon further investigation, it has been made apparent by research conducted by reputable organisations (AMA, CAPS, local doctors) that this could not be further from the truth giving reason for great concern about their air quality modelling, due to the following factors;

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.


It has been made very clear by many professionals, both paid and unpaid by the Northconnex team, that the reasoning for the location of the northern pollution stack, is cost based. Why is such a pollution stack that is so obviously detrimental to the health of the local community being allowed in such a location due to cost? Transurban are a company looking to make a profit from this project, via charging tolls per customer that passes through the tunnel. Why should local residents have to suffer via health issues and loss in property values? Simply so Transurban can make a profit? This is clearly unjust and unmoral.

It concerns me that viable alternatives to the placement and design of the current model appear to be left completely unconsidered. Proposed amendments such as the Equlibria Proposal appear to be completely overlooked, despite their obvious benefits over the current model. This proposal would allow for reduced emissions (horizontal tunnel), the removal of the stack from a densely populated area. Most bizarrely, the proposal allows for money to be recouped via the sale of property on which the current M1 stands. Giving benefits to not just the local community, but Transurban, and the State and Federal Governments.



To address my concerns, I sincerely 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.

Mervyn and Beth Degenhardt
Rosetta Park
Unit 607
1634 Pacific Highway
Wahroonga NSW 2076

12 September 2014

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

We have lived on and off in this local area for over 40 years and recently moved back of our retirement believing this to be a healthy, leafy suburb.

We write in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex as are greatly concerned about the NorthConnex tunnel and request our below objections be considered by NorthConnex and the Department of Planning:

1. The currently proposed location for the ventilation stack is in close proximity of a large number of local schools and pre-schools and at risk of affecting the health wellbeing of young, growing, minds and bodies. Also in proximity of a large number of retirement and elderly care facilities - of which we are part.

2. There are a large number of comprehensive studies on the impact of air pollutants and risks regarding serious health issues and we would like these studies to be considered. Examples of increased disease and identifiable health risk include-poor lung development, autism and congenital heart defects for infants and young children, increased risks of lung cancer, stroke and asthma for adults and the elderly. These studies confirm air pollutants have prothrombotic and inflammatory effects on humans and are causes of the above health problems.

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

4. We are concerned about the large amount of diesel emissions which will be emitted from the NorthConnex tunnel and it's earmarked as a heavy freight bypass Pennant Hills Rd. Diesel emissions are classified as carcinogenic by the World Health Organisation, and contain a larger number of fine particles which penetrate deep into lung tissue and remain there causing inflammation.

5. We are concerned this project includes future provisions for portal emissions in densely populated areas. This further increases the risks of emissions remaining at ground level in a natural valley area where frequent low wind speeds and increases exposure for the local community to pollutants. We object to NorthConnex's claim that there will no portal emissions from current proposals when this cannot be verified.


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

7. We request a full and transparent options assessment process be undertaken for alternative designs for this project. Wahroonga is a unique area and there are alternatives for locating the stack and portals in non-residential areas - unlike other tunnel projects in Sydney.

8. We are concerned that the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is cursory and unconvincing.

We support the CAPS Submission and request that the following actions are undertaken:

I. The air quality and human health impact assessment need to be revised to address the issues raised above.
II. An independent options assessment process should be undertaken to assess alternative locations for the ventilation stack and portals.
III. To undertake a Life Cycle Analysis and assessment for the provision of filtration
IV. A long term health study on children and residents in areas impacted by stack discharges be included as part of the conditions of approval.
V. A comprehensive air quality monitoring program is developed and implemented.
VI. An independent review of the ventilation system is undertaken to ensure that NorthConnex's claim of no portal emissions is justified.
VII. Portal emissions from NorthConnex in the future are banned.
VIII. The Submissions Report/Preferred Project be exhibited to allow the community to respond to the revised information contained in the report.
IX. 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.


Mervyn and Beth Degenhardt
Rosetta Park
Unit 607
1634 Pacific Highway
Wahroonga NSW 2076

12 September 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 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:

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.

Regards,

Shelley Johnston
59A Isis Street, Wahroonga, NSW 2076

12 September 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 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:

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.

Regards,

Eric Johnston
59A Isis Street, Wahroonga, NSW 2076

Dear Director - Infrastructure Projects

NorthConnex Application Number: SSI 13_6136

This is my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.

I would like to state that I object to the location of the northern ventilation stack and portal exit as described in the EIS.

I am extremely concerned about that
the proposed location of the northern ventilation stack is in the centre of a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga. Vast medical research indicates that air pollution is extremely harmful to the health of human beings and that there are no safe limits for air pollution. Any extra pollution from the stack is purely unnecessary to local residential area.
I request that the Department of Planning does not approve the project in its current form due to the significant health risks.

Dear Director - Infrastructure Projects

NorthConnex Application Number: SSI 13_6136

This is my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.

I would like to state that I object to the location of the northern ventilation stack and portal exit as described in the EIS.

I am extremely concerned about that
the proposed location of the northern ventilation stack is in the centre of a densely populated residential area in Wahroonga. Vast medical research indicates that air pollution is extremely harmful to the health of human beings and that there are no safe limits for air pollution. Any extra pollution from the stack is purely unnecessary to local residential area.
I request that the Department of Planning does not approve the project in its current form due to the significant health concerns. I also request that the Department of Planning consider to relocate the stack to a non-residential area, such as industrial or park land areas.

The present plan for the south-west tunnel exit and entrance ramp to the M1 is deplorable. The ramp is basically going through the backyards of the Coral Tree Drive residents. The thousands of trucks that we are being assured that will be taken off Pennant Hills Road are virtually going to be 'parked' on this ramp. There will be a 'slow-down' effect as they move from the ramp into the main lane of the M2. These trucks will also have been 'climbing' from the tunnel & therefore emissions will be of greater concentration. No consideration is being given to the health & well-being of these residents & their young children.
Originally, the exit from the tunnel was to be somewhere near Barclay Road, in bushland rather than in close proximity to homes. A re-assessment of this plan must be undertaken.

To Whom It May Concern:

Re: Proposed M2 integration work as a part of NorthConnex

I am the owner of the property 17 Williams Road, North Rocks.

Our understanding is that you intend to add a continuation of an additional westbound lane for the M1-M2 on the Hills M2 Motorway to the Windsor Road off-ramp and also the relocation of existing operational noise walls along the westbound carriageway.

This is directly behind my property.

I have several serious concerns regarding the proposed M2 integration work as follows:

* The loss of the beautiful bush outlook.
* The loss of the nature and wildlife that live in the bush.
* The additional noise due to the loss of trees that have acted as a barrier to the noise of the M2.
* The additional noise due to the widening of the M2 which will bring the M2 closer to our property.
* Additional pollution due to the loss of the tall trees that currently act as a barrier to the M2.
* Additional pollution due to the extra number of cars per day intended to travel on the motorway.
* The effect the additional pollution will have on my health.
* That the additional vibrations of the roadworks will further affect the foundations of myproperty.
* The loss of value to my property due to all of the above points.

I am writting with Concerns regarding the proposed works to the M2 motorway for the North Connex expansion, and in response to your letter dated 17 March 214 and 27 August 2014.

My wife and I are the owner / residents on Williams Rd, North rocks.

After reviwing the proposed plans for the M2 expansions I wish to express some concerns regarding both the plans and the systems previously used to make determinations on elegibility for for sound proofing measures.

I have concern regarding the plan to add the additional westbound lane (to exit at Windsor road), meaning that the southern side of the road will be moved closer to the houses.

During the previous expansion with an additional east bound lane, some residents on Williams road were offered an assessment regarding sound proofing. This process was conducted based on a visual assessment (no sound readings were taken), additionally this was done, prior too the works being completed.

As part of this expansion the wall on the northern side of the road was raised, while (despite neumerous requests and petitions), the wall on the south side was not raised. This process has already lead to an increase in the noise received from the M2, since I purchased the property, here at 11 Williams rd, North Rocks, as the sound now bounces from the northern wall.

Additionally the height of the wall also means that there is a direct line of sight to heavey vehicles using the M2 from window in my house, many of which have stack exhausts that make the wall completely ineffective. (The noise at night often activating our baby monitor or drowning our our newborns crying).

Additionally the road side of the northern wall was painted in a fluro orange colour, which is a tremendous eye saw.

In addition to these concerns which exist as a result of an unsatisfactory outcomes from the last expansions, I hold concerns that this additional lane will,
Destroy out Bushland views and the habitats that exist within them.
Increased noise due to; A. The roadway being in closer proximity to out house
B. The removal of tress that currently assist with dampening the noise (where the wall currenlty does an unsatisactory job.
Increase air pollution in the area, due to closer proximity and increased traffic.
the risk of damage to our property as a direct or indirect result of the works.

In relation to this concerns I fear for the health our my newborn son, any future children we have, as well as the potential significant loss in value to our property.

I am happy to send photos if this will assist in clarrifying any of these issues, or welcome an arranged visit by a member(s) of your office to see these issues for them selves.

12 September 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/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. For instance, this is only going to be 450m from Abbotsleigh junior school where hundreds of children run around and exercise each day and are going to be breathing in the non filtered carcinogenic ultra fine particles from 9 km of road!!

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. Why should residents have to have this pollutant sitting in the air they breath?

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.


XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX

To Whom It May Concern:

Re: Proposed M2 integration work as a part of NorthConnex

We are writing in response to your letters dated 17 March 2014 and 27 August 2014 regarding the proposed M2 integration work.

My husband and I are the owners of the property 19 Williams Road, North Rocks.

Our understanding is that you intend to add a continuation of an additional westbound lane for the M1-M2 on the Hills M2 Motorway to the Windsor Road off-ramp and also the relocation of existing operational noise walls along the westbound carriageway.

This is directly behind our property.

We have several serious concerns regarding the proposed M2 integration work as follows:

* The loss of our beautiful bush outlook.
* The loss of the nature and wildlife that live in the bush including the fairy wren birds and water dragons.
* The additional noise due to the loss of trees that have acted as a barrier to the noise of the M2.
* The additional noise due to the widening of the M2 which will bring the M2 closer to our property.
* Additional pollution due to the loss of the tall trees that currently act as a barrier to the M2.
* Additional pollution due to the extra number of cars per day intended to travel on the motorway.
* The effect the additional pollution will have on our young children.
* That the additional vibrations of the roadworks will further affect the foundations of our property.
* The loss of value to our property due to all of the above points.
* When we purchased the house we were informed by the M2 that extension of the M2 behind our property would never happen. We were assured that there was no proposed widening of the M2.

We implore you to please take our views into consideration. We are a young family living in our first home and are extremely distressed at the prospect of such disastrous roadworks will have on our current happy family home and life. Please, please, please don't extend the M2 behind our home.

I am submitting an objection to the NorthConnex M1-M2 tunnel because there has to be filtration in the tunnel not stacks to disburse the pollution. There needs to be world class filtration to cover future medical issues. Overseas this is considered essential why not here. Reading reports from both groups of the North and South Stacks it is evident that experts need to be called in to address this issue. Transurban just want to push this through at the cheapest possible price without true regard for peoples health. It is up to Government to stop this and readdress.

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

I am extremely concerned with regards to following issues & appreciate your due consideration. I appreciate the project team's efforts to respond to concerns that have been raised, but the following concerns remain:

1.Northern Ventilation stack's placement in the midst of densely populated residential area surrounded by number of primary schools , aged care facilities & hospitals is extremely distressing & concerning to me & my neighbours.

2. No independent assessment has been carried out with regards to Environmental impact submitted by NorthConnex project. NorthConnex EIS submission does not address 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 exceed the 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
I therefore question the assurances that the tunnel will improve air quality near my home by taking emissions currently dispersed at roadside and dispersing them high into the atmosphere.

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, including in the industrial area of Hornsby.

9. Given the above concerns, I find the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks 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.

Shashi Anupindi
Woonona Ave
Wahroonga 2076

To: The Assessor
Major Projects
Department of Planning and Environment
NSW Government

Re: Application Number SSI 13-6136 Northconnex Tunnel

I live in a heritage listed house in the immediate vicinity of the proposed North entrance to the Northconnex tunnel and ventilation stack, There are 200 or more such heritage items in the area.

For many years the NSW Department of Planning and Environment and Ku ring gai and Hornsby Councils, have required us to maintain our houses to preserve their cultural integrity for the benefit of the community,. It is inconsistent with this objective for the Department to approve a 30 metre modern concrete chimney as the backdrop to these heritage items. I note that in the EIS the effect of the Project on heritage listed housing has not been properly considered.

I believe it is inappropriate for this tunnel entrance and stackto be located in a densely populated area. There are 20,000 residents and visitors, including 9,000+ school children within the immediate vicinity of the stack each working day. The health effects of an unventilated veicle exhaust stack on such a poulation could be disastrous. It seems mathematicallyincongruos for Minister Gay to suggest that there will be a 38% reduction in pollution but that the unfiltered air coming out of the stack will result in only a 0.001% increase in pollution.A large legal liability for health damage and deaths seems likely.

I endorse the CAPS submission in relation to this application.

I believe that, instead of being located in a densely populated area, the tunnel entrance and ventilation stack should be located approximately 2km north on the M1, past the Leighton Place, Hornsby Industrial Area approximately due east of Stokes Avenue Asquith. This is in bushland controlled by the NSW Government,

Several major power lines and other pieces of infrastructure are located in that area, The population is sparse.

I attnded several community forums and wished to ask a question of the panel but on each occasion the convenor was more interest in finishing on time than allowing the many hands up to ask the questions they came to ask. Surely this kind of approach was not what was intended by the legislation

I think it is strange that the Government has approved the Northconnex design without any real discussion or consultation on other approaches or designs to solve the problem of Pennnant Hills Road congestion. I support the concept of a tunnel starting in the bushland through whigh the M1 passes southbound before vehicles arrive at the densely populated area of Wahroonga. If the tunnel entrance and ventilation stack is located there it will not be neccessary to have a significant downhill gradient at the entrance to the tunnel southbound. A similar problem with gradient at the end of the M5 tunnel westbound causes trucks to slow down markedly on ascent at the West exit causing traffic delays frequently. if the M1 enters the tunnel horizontally at its lowest point in Asquith this roadblock problem will not arise.

Finally i believe the EIS is deficient in many ways in not considering many effects as required by law, including air quality effects via multistorey building air measurements (ours is a two storey Federation building).

I believe the documentation issued by Northconnex is misleading and deceptive in many respects and its use as the basis for community consultation will not withstand challenge in a court of law, which will be a cost burden to the Department and the people of NSW.

I request that the Project not be approved.

Kind regards

Ian Maxton

.

The placement of the motorways will negatively affect the health of ourselves and to our families, especially to our children due to the amount of carbon dioxide that will be released into the air.

There must be a re-assessment of the present plan for the tunnel, exit & south-west approach ramp to the M1.

Many issues need to be addressed, such as :-

1. The ramp being virtually in the backyards of residents.

2. Thousands of trucks climbing from the tunnel to exit.

3.Therefore a concentrated volume of emissions of carcinogenic pollutants.

4. There being a 'slow-down' effect of trucks before entering the M2 turning the ramp into a congested road, far worse than than the present situation on Pennant Hill Road due to the confined space of the on-ramp.

5. The increased noise level in lowering the sound-wall.

6. The dangers for health & well-being of residents & young children.

7. Visual impact.

8. Regard for the rights of residents must surely be considered when their health, both physical & mental, is at risk.

8. Home devaluation.

It is vitally important that these matters be addressed . There must also be greater transparency. Even now, some definitive information is being withheld, or at the least, is not forthcoming.

NorthConnex Application Number: SSI 13_6136

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

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 (school, aged care facilities, homes, businesses are effected).

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 also 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.

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.

I endorse the caps group submission in its entirety.

I endorse the caps group submission in its entirety.