NorthConnex

TRELAWNEY STREET FACILITY - Please DO NOT PUBLICATE OUR NAMES AND ADDRESS




Our suggestions are




1) As suggested by the Public at the Air Quality forum, an ICAC investigation should be opened to investigate the following,




* Were there genuine attempts to avoid residential areas?
* Was any consideration given to the traffic on the Loch Maree during the 24 hour construction period? All traffic from Trelawney, Nelson Street and other roads linked go through Loch Maree Avenue. How can the residents cope during the construction period?
* Why build 100 car parking spaces behind the Trelawney Street Facility Unit on the residential side of the Pennant Hills Road?
* Were there any political donations by big businesses on the industrial side of Pennant Hills Road in Thornleigh? No businesses are affected by the tunnel (wherever these stores are located, customers do not stop using the services or stop making their purchases. If so why not move the tunnel facility and align tunnel accordingly on the industrial side of Pennant Hills Road? Why didn't anyone pay attention to the residents living 24 hours a day?




2) Why not take the following into account without just considering only the Northconnex budget?




* Original preferred proposal was to take into account railway corridor without impacting the residents living in the area.
* Instead of building the tunnel under houses why not consider buildings under railway corridor or Pennant Hills Road reserve or under a non populated reserve area?
For example -
Why not select the site for the Emergency Supply Unit where the industrial and commercial area (where the Ibis Hotel, Kennard Storage, Old brick pit, batching plant, Bunnings, McDonalds and its overflow car park, or the Thornleigh Community centre) is located? Businesses are not affected the way the residential properties are, where people live 24 hours a day. Business can be relocated without affecting the employment opportunities and it is not like the impact to the residents living in that area?




3) Has any study been done on the possibility of causing sink holes? In some places on Trelawney Street, the tunnel is to be built just 16 metres below ground! Our house was built in 2013 and the soil underground is basically clay. Yet, Northconnex says that they cannot build the Tunnel Facility on the old Brick Pit as the ground is not stable as the underground soil is clay!




4) If the government decides to go ahead with this project, will the local government take actions to reduce the rates payable for the properties impacted? It is not fair for the affected residents to bare the loss on their property value and at the same time, pay the same rates as those residents not affected. The Government says this project is for everyone to benefit. Has the State government taken any action to allocate more funds for the improvement of the street and drainage infrastructure in the affected streets like Loch Maree and Trelawney Street?




5) As per the searches carried by the conveyancer at the time we bought the vacant land in Oct 2012 (attached for your reference), there was no notice of the proposed construction of the tunnel under Trelawney Street. However the documents indicating the proposed alignments and the favourable option of the tunnel alignment was included in the tender documents of the properties which were on sale at the same period in The Esplanade. However, interactive maps published on the Webpage shows the studies were carried out by the Northconnex around the same time as the pictures show that our house was just being prepared for construction. Had the proposal been disclosed at that time, we wouldn't have spent so much money to build our house. We feel that we were misled by the responsible authorities by not mentioning that our property will be affected by the tunnel. Therefore we would like to know what sort of compensation you could offer if the project goes ahead as per the current preferred proposal.
For our financial loss (drop in property value),
For the stress caused, due to the above,
For the impact on our health due to toxic emissions from the emergency air intake unit to be built.




6) We believe the proposed alignment is the worst one we have seen. The previously preferred purple option of the SKM study had the proposed tunnel 40m underground. However the tunnel constructed in Trelawney Street is only 30m to 16m underground. The new tunnel is to be 90m underground in some locations around West Pennant Hills. Have Transurban and RMS considered the additional cost that would be incurred for the construction of access ramp to the 90m deep tunnel? If the tunnel is under the rail or Pennant Hills road corridors, the depth of the tunnel is much less than the proposed.




7) Barry O'Farrell announced the preferred scheme. However, later he was against the scheme as his voters get affected. Please refer to the article in Hornsby Advocate issued in April 14.




A tunnel may be a solution to reduce vehicular traffic in the CBD. The outskirts of Sydney needs Ring roads to divert interstate heavy trucks. A ring road will benefit the population and businesses in a number of suburbs.




We do not support the tunnel because it will benefit only a few.

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attachement

see attached

see attached

see attached

The major flaw of the EIS - NorthConnex Project overview clearly states that the NorthConnex would take 5,000 trucks off Pennant Hills Road each day, and it would have capacity to carry more than 100,000 vehicles per day (50,000 in each direction). However the EIS emission calculation misleadingly used the figure of 19,500 vehicles per day per direction as the basis for their calculation. The EIS vehicle emission has been underestimated by using the figure of 19,500 daily vehicles in lieu of 50,000 daily vehicles. Therefore, the purported EIS calculation is not only unreliable but raises the concern whether it accurately includes the "5,000 [daily] trucks off Pennant Hills Road".

I strongly object to the placement of an UNFILTERED stack in the suburb of Wahroonga. It is in a residential area surrounded by schools attended by over 9 300 children.

Please read my submission in File attachment 1.

My submission which is an objection to the EIS is uploaded below in PDF format.

See uploaded attachment.

See uploaded attachment.

The submission attached re NorthConnex deals with the need for a corridor and adjacent roads and areas strategy post approval for the project and a decision to proceed.

I agree with the attached SCAPS submissions .

I agree with the attached submissions.

I agree with the attached SCAPS submission.

I agree with the attached SCAPS submission.

I DO NOT want my personal detail published or made available