Sydney Metro West - The Bays to Sydney CBD Mod 1

Please see attached document

As an owner/occupier of 115 Pyrmont Street, I strongly object to the plan to relocate this cavern on the grounds of increased risk of noise, vibration, damage or loss of my 140 year old terrace house as well as to many other houses in this immediate neighbourhood. The reason for the relocation from the Bays appear to be mainly that of cost saving.

As a resident of 115, Pyrmont Street, I object strongly to the plan to relocate this cavern, on the grounds of increased risk of noise, vibration, damage to this 140-year old terrace house, as well as to many other old houses in the neighbourhood. The reason for the relocation from the Bays appear to be mainly that of cost-saving.

attached

Pyrmont Action is objecting to the relocation on the cross over cavern from bays to Pyrmont

Continue support to the local township and their businesses and community donations for improvement and support. Local security for family and friends for future generations.

The information provided at-
caportal.com.au/tfnsw/sydmetrowest/map
is confusing.
The text says that the proposed scissors cross-over is to be located to the EAST of Pyrmont Station, but the illustration provided by Alex Greenwich, MP, shows the cross-over to the WEST of the station.
Please clarify this matter, and extend the losing date for submissions.

While I support the improved consultation undertaken with Modification Request (Mod 1) for the Major civil construction between The Bays and Sydney CBD (the EIS had very limited exposure), I submit that this request does not fully consider the impact increased scope of the extra tunnelling work associated with the addition of the cross-over cavern with the Pyrmont metro station. This will impact the time associated with tunnelling works and the affected area and greatly increase the risk of further impacting residents in the area. I OBJECT 24 HOUR tunnelling which is outside of standard hours. Assessment of the impact is deficient in several aspects:

Noise and Vibration: There will be an increase in the duration of tunnelling operations and the area of impact which I believe is not realistically addressed in the modification request. There seems to be an emphasis on business operations and little assessment of the impact to the quality of life of residents close to the Pyrmont station east site. Residential sites identified on the noise and vibration maps seem to be inconsistently chosen based on the distance from the tunnel centre-line. Pyrmont is a mixed business and residential are and consideration of residents seems to have been neglected. Additional mitigation measures for this modification from the Sydney Metro Construction Noise and Vibration Standard (CNVS) for resident quality of life seems inadequate. This modification has not considered the joint impact of this and the concurrent Harbourside development in the area.

Traffic, cycle and pedestrian impact: The increased scope including the additional waste material from the cross-over cavern will have an impact on construction traffic on the already crowded Pyrmont roads and crossings. There is no consideration in the modification report of this and the impact of concurrent demolition and construction of the Harbourside development on traffic in the area. This report should reference Harbourside Development traffic plan and the anticipated density of trucks, noise and other construction traffic from BOTH projects.

Selection of Non-aboriginal heritage items: there are only two heritage items on the Worst-case vibration impact maps for Pyrmont. There are significant heritage listed and heritage inventory items close to tunnelling that are missing from the maps. These should be assessed for vulnerability to damage from resulting vibration from tunnelling. These include The Pyrmont Bridge, The Pyrmont Bridge Hotel and adjacent terraces and many others. These should be included in the map and assessment for monitoring.

I live in the Pyrmont area directly across from the proposed Union St metro station. The works will cause immense noise and disrupt my at home business and sleep. Moreover the historical and heritage value of the area will be finished by the increased traffic. The Pyrmont area is already subject to major infrastructure concerns with routine power outages and failures due to underground faults. Whilst my concerns are primarily around the noise and environmental hazards which I understand there is a plan to mitigate, but the further stain on the power grid and other services in the area. Noise is never properly managed in projects like these. While I object to the location of the proposed station in Pyrmont, if the project goes forward I object to the 24/7 operating and works. Given the residential nature of the area and the fact that numerous people live and sleep here I request the works be commenced only during normal hours.