To whom it may concern,

I object to the current proposal as it stands. I believe that the environmental impact of the upgrade far outweighs any benefits to the broader community.

Obviously local residents will be severely impacted by the noise, air pollution and large truck movements.

Of particular concern is the potential damage to homes by the construction. The tunnel depths do not appear to take into account this significant risk to residents and their property. Examples of this being further reduced are the WestConnex EIS. This is clearly unacceptable to residents.

Perhaps the worst impact is the dredging of Sydney Harbour. As a father of two young children (two and five) and owner of dogs the harbour is a key part of life. In current proposal there appears to be no detail of the potential toxins that will be released into the water and what affect this will have on marine life. We regularly play with the kids and dogs on the foreshore collecting shells and watching the fish from the wharf at Birchgrove Oval. I am extremely concerned about the release of these toxic chemicals into the environment and potential impact on my children. A thorough and independent review of the impacts must be completed.

Regards
Warren Barnes

I strongly object to the nominal or nil references of serious impacts & reality consequences compounded by the option of hiding behind a state significant infrastructure project with regards to Chapter 16 - Geology, soils and groundwater and Chapter 23 - Hazards and risks.
Within 23-14 the statement of 'high quality Hawkesbury sandstone would be encountered for the majority of the proposed tunnel alignment', does not translate to any reference to it's most significant risk of silicosis!
What is silicosis?
Accelerated silicosis is an aggressive and incurable form of lung disease which traditionally affects construction workers, farmers, miners and engineers.
It is caused by breathing in unsafe levels of silica dust, which can scar your lungs and cause them to stiffen.
What is silica dust?
Silica is contained in construction materials such as concrete, bricks, tiles, sandstone and granite.
When those materials are worked on (drilled, cut, crushed and so on) tiny particles of silica are released into the air.
Yet again recent local evidence, Metro tunnel surrounding North Sydney and the Ausgrid Artarmon to Mosman project in 2019 have had to be reported to the EPA and North Sydney Council with regards to uncontrolled (not wet down) dust (mostly from sandstone dig sites) impacting residents, the community nearby and the site workers.
Yet this reality didn't even get a mention in the assessment of W18 (Morden st had the Ausgrid project dig right down it with a very thin layer of bitumen/soil before sandstone was the primary below ground substance , made even more obvious by the historical knowledge that this area was a sandstone quarry). Workers on site were not even aware of what sandstone was, being from the northern hemisphere let alone the risks and mitigation factors that should have been part of their daily construction procedure & process. There was more concern for pumping out groundwater that accumulated from underground water (which has also led to sink holes since) than wetting down dust at a time of water restrictions with residents, commuter parkers and school children walking along the same street .
So in a 'moderately high risk' area W18 for potential contaminants and associated impacts Inhalation and/or ingestion risk to site workers of hazardous building materials via dust ' is all that has been investigated by such a lengthy detailed project analysis?
We are also concerned with the inclusion of contaminants mentioned in 16-34
'Warringah Freeway, North Sydney to Cammeray (AEI7) [W9 to W18] The unsealed areas adjacent to the Warringah Freeway (including St Leonards Park) represent a potential source of contamination (namely lead, hydrocarbons, pesticides, PCBs and asbestos) associated with the current and historical deposition of particulates from large volume traffic flows using the Warringah Freeway. Asbestos and PAH compounds have been detected in soil samples collected from some locations at concentrations exceeding open space and commercial/industrial guidelines protective of human health. These areas pose a moderate to high contamination risk to construction given that contamination is known and potentially present within soil which is likely to be excavated and exposed during construction of surface works, the pedestrian bridge and the following construction support sites: Berry Street north (WHT8), Ridge Street north (WHT9), Cammeray Golf Course (WHT10 and WFU8), High Street south (WFU2), High Street north (WFU3), Arthur Street east (WFU4), Berry Street east (WFU5), Ridge Street east (WFU6), Merlin Street (WFU7), and Rosalind Street east (WFU9).
This appears to be a detailed analysis but none of the + mitigation or - consequences are explained or acknowledged in a transparent, informative or responsible manner which a project of this budget, personnel or 'state significance' should command!

I object to the construction of another major roadwork project. The overwhelming sentiment around the world is that fossil fuels are slowing destroying the planet. We don't need more cars on the roads. What we need is mass transport systems that will move large numbers o people at rapid speed to and from their place of work. The recent introduction of the B line on the Northern beaches is a good example.
I object to the incomplete nature of the proposal where very rubbery figures are submitted as if black on white means it will happen. The unfortunate track record of this government on major projects is abysmal. It means that the overall costs are under estimated and with that the the need to recoup the costs by even higher tolls on the unsuspecting public. We need to know the true cost of the project, probably twice as much and twice as long duration.
If the project is bulldoze through then I want to see more protections for our green spaces which are in for a tough time, Cammeray Golf Club, Flat Rock Gully and Saint Leonard's Park. Our children deserve it.
I finally object to the erection of exhaust stacks near a school. Our children deserve better.

I object to this proposal on the following grounds:
1.Having travelled widely and admired the smooth and efficient public transport systems in many other cities which add immeasurably to the quality of life in those cities, I am bitterly disappointed that the NSW Government is so backward in their approach as to fund a scheme such as this
2.I am also surprised that it is only now (when the schemes are underway) that the public is being called upon to provide feedback
3. The metrics around this tunnel have not been thoroughly investigated nor has it been assessed against alternate plans (such as improving the accessibility and frequency of public transport)
4. The disruption to everyday life in the inner west caused by increased traffic, effects on buildings, the creation of stacks, destruction of parks (Yurulbin) , possible health problems have not been considered in this poorly conceived plan

Re: Western Harbour crossing

1. Green Space: I object to the the taking of green open public space for this project particularly the use of Cammeray golf club and St Leonards park. I understand there will be several very large unsightly sheds on the side of Cammeray golf course....Why can't these be located underground with green space over the top to provide a green corridor.

2. Filtration: I object to the lack of filtration in the proposed tunnel due to close proximity to schools,day care centres and homes and for the general health of the community.
If the scheme is to go ahead it should be redesigned with filtered exhaust stacks at the very least. Why create future environmental damage?

3. Rail option: I object that there doesn't seem to be a consideration of a public transport option ( e.g rail) into the northern Beaches rather than increasing road congestion. What about light rail from Chatswood to Dee Why for example?

I would like the air quality to be filtered from the smoke stacks at North Sydney as I am a high school teacher in the area and the air quality levels would compromise the quality of life for the youth of our future.

Attention: Director, Transport Assessments
Planning & Assessment, Department of Planning
Industry and Environment
Locked Bag 5022
Parramatta NSW 2124

10 March 2020


Dear Sir,
Objection: Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade - SSI-8863

I write to express my strong objection on multiple grounds to the Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade proposal

First and foremost, we should not be proposing this project in the first instance. The current population centre of Sydney is west of Paramatta. With a population of over 5 million expected to grow to 7 million in 20 years, a 40% increase. Dedicating yet more multiple millions of dollars of public money to inner city road infrastructure is the last thing any sane government should be doing at this time. More roads will simply encourage more private vehicle use; increase air pollution; further clog the already over capacity associated road networks; and use scarce finance that should far more productively be put towards public transport infrastructure programs.
In relation to the project itself.
The EIS is not a contract document and even if accepted is open to change once a builder is signed up. It is indicative only of what might eventually be built.
The construction period when taken in context with the current WestConnex project will inflict further years of social disruption to communities already under stress.
The predicted traffic movements of hundreds of trucks and workers vehicles will inevitably increase traffic congestion in the local area; raise already bad air pollution and noise levels, and as the WestConnex project has shown see already limited street parking taken up by site workers.
From the figures provided in the EIS for the White Bay operation it will generate 700 heavy vehicle trips per day and 530 light vehicles – almost one movement a minute over a 24 hour period. Quite apart from the noise and air pollution generated all these vehicles will have to negotiate an already over capacity dysfunctional road system to access and exit the site. The EIS claims only five buildings will be adversely impacted by noise, although unclear, one assumes each of these building actually contains multiple dwellings.
Why roadheader options for taking the proposed under the harbour rather than the trench/surface laid proposal has been dismissed is inexplicable and inexcusable. A full tunnel would remove the need for the whole dredging operation, not require the White Bay operation and delete the need for the coffer dam and its associated works that will largely destroy the environment and amenity of the northern end of Birchgrove peninsula for years it not forever. As proposed the dredging option will be expensive, highly disruptive and release vast quantities of toxic material into the water column of the harbour. Releasing toxic plumes into the water will only jeopardise the already fragile natural marine environment of the harbour that contains rare and endangered flora and fauna.
The EIS indicates that vehicle exhaust will be fed into the exhaust stack associated with the WestConnex project. This stack is not proposed to be fitted with filters. To subject the surrounding community to the outfall of exhaust from both the WestConnex and Western Harbour Tunnel is at the very least blatant government irresponsibility. A total disregard for the health and wellbeing of its citizens.
Sydney’s population centre is west of Paramatta. The city’s population is expected to grow by 2 million over the next 20 years, with the bulk of this growth taking place well outside the city centre. To go ahead with this tunnel project would be a waste of valuable public resources and a missed opportunity to support the transformation of our city’s public transport system to make getting around the greater Sydney region cheaper, easier and faster without having to get into a car and pay a toll.

Yours sincerely,
Peter Murray

5 Tobruk Avenue
Balmain
NSW 2041


Declaration of any reportable political donations
made in the previous 2 years No reportable donation made.

Please see attached letter.

I object to the content in Appendix G Noise & Vibration whereby in 846 pages statements are included such as WFU - there are limited available noise source and noise path mitigation measures available during OOHW (hours of work 1-6pm Sat & 8am-6pm). So after all that content, we have no peace in average down times for the local community?
Another example is 'the worst affected receivers for each NCA are typically in the first row of buildings with direct line of sight to the work area', really how many pages did it take to back that very obvious statement?
My next example has to be on the best page on 475 to 'Develop a Heavy Vehicle Code of Conduct' HVCC which would include noise management such as limited idling and compression braking. So let's give you a look into the reality of NCA 29.1 / L28 noise recordings of Sept 2017 area taken from the now compulsory acquired property at 53 Bellevue St Cammeray.
Limited idling - with the Bus Layover established in 2009 up to 30 buses at a time idle with mostly diesel engines on for a/c to stay on for many hours a day and could do so all day/night if they wish. It is proposed to move this site closer to our homes as part of WFU8, so that to me totally contradicts the promise of less noise and really pollution too...
Compression braking - in November 2019, I was over the extremely loud truck compression breaking within the Warringah Fwy, heard in all parts of my home and often at perceived quiet traffic noise times, enough to wake you from sleep or distract you from another noise such as TV. I called the appropriate area and after several hand overs was explaining to the NSW government employee what compression braking actually was! To say that my issue went know where would be fair, as a resident of 20yrs + the amount of heavy vehicle movements with compression braking was excessive at this time and no doubt related to high 'construction' truck movements in North Sydney...and as I type now, there was compression braking event at 11pm on a Sunday night, why???

Finally WFNB_006 - Noise wall Figure 7.3 on page 504 shows a 7.5 metre high, 326 metre long structure with the text 'constructability constraints' will be further investigated, so why hasn't this happened first and why does it stop at 326 metres in the gap between two buildings which is exactly where more noise travels through!