NorthConnex

Please refer to the attached document which outlines our submission

I have uploaded my submission, please see attached.

Many thanks

Helen

I have attached my submission.

Please find attached my objection to the project as described in the EIS.

Regards
XXXXX

I originally mailed this but it appears you never received it.

The proposed traffic disruption and unfiltered air that will affect my residential neighbourhood is unacceptable and as outlined in the attached submission there are ways to alleviate the continued disruption to my neighbourhood.
Do it right and take a long term view of the impact that is going to occur, think people not profit!

4 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7. I am concerned about the multiple flaws in the air quality modelling of the northern stack in the EIS. These include:

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

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

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

10. I am concerned that eventhough general motor vehicle emissions are dispersed easily on normal roads, tunnels concentrate these emissions and they are being dispersed in one location at each end and close to residential areas. The outlets should be moved - especially the northern outlet, as it is close to homes, schools and hospitals.


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.

10. Consideration to adopt the possible solution outlined in the attached Equilbria Proposal.



XXXXXXX
.

4 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7. I am concerned about the multiple flaws in the air quality modelling of the northern stack in the EIS. These include:

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

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

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

10. I am concerned that eventhough general motor vehicle emissions are dispersed easily on normal roads, tunnels concentrate these emissions and they are being dispersed in one location at each end and close to residential areas. The outlets should be moved - especially the northern outlet, as it is close to homes, schools and hospitals.


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.

10. Consideration to adopt the possible solution outlined in the attached Equilbria Proposal.



XXXXXX

See Attachment

Attn: Director of infrastructure Projects
Director Infrastructure Projects
Department of Planning and Environment
Major Projects Assessment
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001



Submitted by:
A. Jackson
M. Jackson


9 Loch Maree Ave
Thornleigh
NSW 2120
 
Dear Sir / Madam,


PROPOSED NORTHCONNEX M1 / M2 TUNNEL PROJECT - Application Number - SSI 13_6136

We object to aspects of this project

We would like to record that we are in favour of a tunnel linking the M2 with the F3 / M1. We see this as a necessary improvement to local roads and the wider Sydney road network as a whole. It will clearly benefit most residents along the Pennant Hills Road corridor once complete. It will also greatly benefit the long-haul freight vehicles travelling between Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland. However, we have serious concerns with regard to the tunnel project and believe that there are a number of aspects which have not been taken into consideration or remain at this stage unclear.

Our concerns fall into two sections. These are:

1. Traffic Management (i.e. spoil removal from Trelawney St site):
1.1. The exhibited proposal is that trucks will enter the site from Pennant Hills Rd, via Loch mare Ave and leave directly onto Pennant Hills Rd. Expected traffic would be 1 truck /minute.
1.2. Trucks destined to travel north will then enter Phyllis Ave, circle around the roundabout and then make a left hand turn onto Pennant Hills Rd.
To achieve this, large trucks will have to cross 3 lanes of traffic to turn right into Phyllis Ave. The lights at Phyllis have a right hand turn arrow every 20sec with a 2 - 2.5 min wait.

With existing traffic on Pennant Hills Rd and the timing of the lights it will not be possible to achieve the anticipated rate of truck movements.

1.3. Empty trucks from the South will have to turn right from Pennant Hills Rd into Loch Maree Ave. Again, the timing of the lights for this right hand turn is approximately every 20sec with a 2 - 2.5 min wait.

Even assuming the junction is clear with the current phasing the lights will not possibly achieve the projected rate of truck movements. An alternative approach needs to be put in place.

ACTION: One possible solution is for trucks exiting the Trelawney St site to head south only and dump their load at sites in the south or south west. On their return, heading North on Pennant Hills Rd they collect the next load from Wilson St site and then head north only on pennant Hills Rd to dump at a site to the North. On their return heading south they can enter the Trelawney site directly from Pennant Hills Rd.

1.4. Given the obvious difficulties that the truck drivers will face, there will be an incentive to use local streets for access/egress and parking.

ACTION: Given the site will operate 24/7 it is essential that all trucks be absolutely prohibited from using Trelawney St, Loch Mare Ave & Nelson St below the site entrance for access, egress or parking.

1.5. The site will operate 24/7 and as such will cause unbearable and insufferable disturbance to the local houses in these streets especially at night.

ACTION: To alleviate the noise disturbance a suitable acoustic barrier should be constructed across the eastern side of the site covering the truck entry and exit path ensuring that waiting truck noise is kept to a minimum.

2. Parking on the Trelawney St site (i.e. proposed 100 spaces for workers)
The original proposal was that workers would park at the Pioneer St site, which the RMS is taking over, and be ferried to the Trelawney St site (and other sites) by van.

The current plans show parking for 100 cars on the eastern boundary of the Trelawney St site. His parking will be within 6m of houses adjoining the site. Considering the site is proposed to operate 24/7 this solution has completely ignored the impact it will have on local residents.

ACTION: Parking at the Trelawney St site should be kept to a basic minimum for essential staff only and for for short term use. Also, workers should be prohibited from using Trelawney St, Loch Maree and Nelson St for parking and the original plan to ferry in workers from pioneer Ave should be installed.

I attach my submission letter regarding the NorthConnext project
R A Schaverien

I submit my letter regarding the NorthConnex project and their proposed stack in the residential area of Wahroonga.
Bernard Schaverien

see attached pdf

I object pending further investigations as detailed in my submission.

Council reserve behind Lisle and Savoy Courts WPH:

On 22 July 2014 site visit, Project Director, M2 Upgrade at Transurban's Garret O'Connor advised that:

* The catchment area at the ramps is proposed to be increased by around 25%. Even in the unlikely event that the current detention pond is doubled in size, the upgraded pond footprint shouldn't encroach much beyond the creek currently crossing the reserve behind Savoy and Lisle Courts i.e. not beyond the eastern point of the rear fence of 18 Lisle Court .

* The vast majority of the current reserve (i.e. east of the rear fence of 18 Lisle Court) is unlikely to be impacted, including the current pathways and the M2 boundary fence from the end of 12 Savoy Court's rear fence to several metres West of the bridge over the runoff creek.

* There may be a need for light vehicular access along the current boundary area north of the M2 wall east of Oakes Road to assist in the construction of the off ramp. This is unlikely due to the limitation of the current width on size of vehicle that may access plus the cost of laying piping for the current runoff drain and installing a road surface.


The attached site visit summary wording was approved by Amber Cameron (NorthConnex Place Manager) and Garret O'Connor and put in every letter box in Lisle & Savoy Cts, Larchmont, Gum Grove & Mundon Plces, removing a lot of the angst and concerns about the impact on the reserve.

In late August we found out from Michael Lathlean, Manager-Community Planning & Special Infrastructure Projects at The Hills Shire Council: "As part of the NorthConnex Project, the RMS has or is compulsorily acquiring 79 properties along the route of the project. One of those is Lisle Court Reserve"

Since my 22 July meeting with Garrett O'Connor, despite multiple requests on the staff at NorthConnex showroom at Pennant Hills, no one can tell me what work is proposed for the reserve nor can they find an expert for me to talk to on why more than a limited extra reserve land area is required to be acquired and what is to be done with the trees and pathway through the reserve.

A significant number of grandparent, parents, children and pets use the reserve every day and it is the most direct walking path to M2 buses and Carmen Drive shops for everyone living in Savoy Ct, Larchmont Pl and Gum Grove Pl.

No land should be acquired until the project has been approved and there is confirmation of what area of the reserve will actually be required. The local community should then have the right to comment on the planned impact of the work on the reserve.

The minimum amount of land required for NorthConnex project should be compulsory acquired, not the whole reserve.

Please find attached we submission covering
- the Executive Summary
- the Traffic and Transport Section
- the Construction

Please confirm receipt of these submissions

Brian Ash
for the
Pennant Hills District Civic Trust Inc.

6 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 we object to the project as described in the EIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

To address my/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.

Monte Boyd
3 Pinera Close, Hornsby, NSW, 2077

6 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 we object to the project as described in the EIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

To address my/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.

Please find attached Submission in PDF format.

Please find PDF of submission attached.