I am very concerned about the Blues Point Temporary Retrieval Site, particularly the plan to remove waste material and deliver concrete using trucks.
The noise, dust and disruption caused by the movement of 6 trucks an hour, almost every day, every week, every month, for 18 months (!) would be an unnecessarily harsh imposition on residents and visitors to this popular scenic picnic spot with its views of the Opera House and Sydney Harbour Bridge.
Blues Point Road is narrow, and many of the heritage buildings could easily suffer damage from the vibration of the heavy truck movements.
Given the length of the disruption involved, it is only reasonable that barges be used instead of trucks, so as to minimise the noise, vibration, traffic chaos and dust as much as possible.
While I accept that some discomfort is needed to create progress for everyone's benefit, I repeat that 18 months of discomfort for Blues Point Road residents and visitors is unreasonable, particularly when a viable alternative exists.
I respectfully request that the less disruptive option, ie barges, be adopted, instead of trucks.

I am currently an owner of an and am shocked to learn that the Sydenham to Chatswood train line will be built underneath my apartment. The apartment has 20 metres of under ground car spaces underneath of which technicians were not aware. This would result in a 10 metre buffer between my building and the train line. I spent my whole childhood living adjacent to a train line. We were 20 metres from the train line and the train line is 15 metres below ground level. Despite this we constantly had the noise from the trains passing. The vibrations from the trains are so significant that mirrors have fallen off cupboards. I do not want to suffer from noise pollution when I have purchased an apartment in a location which I expected to be quieter than the centre of the city.

The train line would much better be built under. There would be a much larger buffer between buildings and train tracks.

Rubber wheels and tracks would also reduce noise.

The construction of tunnels underneath the building can also result in structural problems with the building. Who will pay for these?

There has also been reports of removal of spoil 24/7. Once again this will result in noise pollution.

I believe the buffers and levels of noise are grossly underestimated.

Obviously, all of the above factors will affect

There has been limited public information on this proposal and the time given for objections has been limited.

I hope that you take the time to consider my objection

I am writing regarding the tunnel route proposed for the Sydney Metro City & Southwest Corridor and Twin Tunnel Route to Barangaroo.

I was surprised to learn that train tunnelling will occur directly under.

I attended the information session at , but was not reassured. Indeed, I was told there was no guarantee that train noise would be inaudible at the predicted levels of 30-35 dB - particularly at night in a quiet bedroom. As the agent explained "it depends on the person".

I also note the complex has an extensive garage area that is far lower than the surface level of, so the estimated depth of the tunnel 50 meters below does not reflect the depth of the tunnel below the garage of.

Our strong recommendation is to tunnel under the, rather than under a The building contains no residents, and is unoccupied at night, over weekends, or on public holidays. We do understand such a minor re-routing would not eliminate train noise entirely, but it could reduce it to below the threshold of audibility.

As residential taxpayers and ratepayers, we purchased a because of the quiet location both day and night. We are concerned that metro trains every few minutes traveling directly under our complex will negatively impact on the quiet environment of , and would urge you to re-consider the routing of the tunnel

I am totally opposed to the Blues Point Temporary Retrieval Site.
I cannot believe that the State Government would even consider such an intrusive proposal that would destroy our quality of life and quiet enjoyment for around 2 years.
the noise and dust will be non stop, 11 hours a day, around 5 heavy trucks an hour, one every 10 minutes or so.(... and sometimes at night !)
It appears that we get the inconvenience, but not any benefit !
Was the (unpopulated) Barrangaroo site considered for retrieval ?
What about retrieval from the Victoria Cross site ?
I feel you need to consider the above 2 options as an alternative to destroying a quiet residential area for 2 years.
Thank you.

Please rensider

Attention: Director, Infrastructure Projects
Unit 4, Mitchell Gardens, 33 Mitchell Street, McMahons Point NSW 2060
Phone 02-9922-4860 Mobile: 0498 664 752 Email: [email protected].
Subject: 2 & 3 Chatswood to Sydenham Impact of Sydney Metro City & Southwest Corridor and Twin Tunnel Route. Application number SSI 15_7400:
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to object to the route that being proposed for the Sydney Metro City & Southwest Corridor and Twin Tunnel Route as it crosses from Victoria Cross Station to Barangaroo Station. I have examined the relevant details (see Appendix E of volume 2b, p. 6 and Appendix H1 of volume 2b, p. 10) of your seven volume Environmental Impact Report, and believe that the permanent noise and vibration levels arising from the proposed route may negatively impact on our residential complex of 13 townhouses situated at 29-33 Mitchell Street, McMahons Point.
This disruption may be avoidable, however.
Currently, the proposed route swings sharply West from Chuter Street toward our residential complex while avoiding the Corporate Head Office & NSW Operations Office of Compass Group Australia at 51-35 Mitchell Street, McMahons Point. After this trajectory, it again swings back towards Blues Point Road.
The result is that the noise level for most units in Mitchell Gardens units has been assessed as 31-35 dB. In contrast, the non-residential office complex at 51-35 Mitchell Street (the old Pacific Magazines building) is less affected even though it remains unoccupied at nights, over weekends and on public holidays. It would seem more sensible to tunnel directly under 51-35 Mitchell Street, and not under Mitchell Gardens.
As taxpayers and ratepayers, local residents have a right to the uninterrupted, peaceful enjoyment of their homes. Your Summary admits that, "in 2024, there will be ultimate capacity for a metro train every two minutes in each direction under the city." As a consequence, the character of our section of the Mitchell Street precinct, a highly prized and sought after dormitory suburb, could be severely and irreversibly impacted.
With thanks for all your care of and attention to my objection.
William S. Pidding
Owner/Occupier
Unit 4, 33 Mitchell Street
McMahons Point NSW 2060

I have attended several consultation meetings related to the development of the Eveleigh site and have studied the proposals for Waterloo. Whilst agreeing that development and re-development of these sites is necessary, indeed desirable, I CANNOT agree with the density levels proposed. Redfern and Waterloo are already congested areas when it comes to moving around and badly affect movement in the neighbouring areas of Alexandria, Darlington and Surry Hills. (WestConnex project is simply going to make this worse and cannot be regarded as improving transport options.) The State has to investment more of tax-payers money into public housing and not rely on increasing densities in order to avoid that responsibility.

a) the proposed location of the rail line under the building may vary by up to 30 metres
(b) that the purported depth of the tunnel under the building is significantly overstated
(c) tunnel noise and vibration are likely to be significantly worse than the public documents disclose due to:
(i) as I understand it, non-recognition of the existence of the underground car park
(ii) the failure to allow for the fact that the maximum permissible inclination of the rail line means the tunnel depth will be much closer to ground level at Towns Place than the Proposal plans disclose
(iii) the absence of sound attenuation (rubber buffers to reduce noise and vibrations) in the area between the Harbour and the Barangaroo station.

I think if we do decide to continue the Sydney Metro through the southwest, we should NOT use single decker trains.

Single deckers do have the larger doors and it is easier and faster for passengers to enter and disembark the train on single deckers. But overall double-deckers carry that much more capacity, that overrall, in 1 hour you could have up to 30 single deckers deckers arrive in the city, but you could have 20 double deckers which still commutes more than a single decker.


In perspective, at stations spacing typical of non-metro style rail, single deckers cannot run at anywhere near 40% more frequently per track than equivalent double deckers when signalling capacity is equal, the latter having about 40% more floor space and more than 50% more seats. If the signalling capacity allows 20 double decker trains per hour, it only allows 22 single deckers, assuming suburban station spacing. But it takes 25 single deckers to carry as many as 20 double deckers.

I strongly object to this proposal
Due to the tunnels location noise
and vibrations will be intolerable.
Disturbances during construction
will result in dust and traffic noise
when the spoil is moved.
The tunnels should be moved away
from towns place.

As a local resigned in Blues Point Road I object to the devastating impact of the removal of blues point reserve for at least 2 years. The tree at the site will be impacted, the site is used by the public daily. The noise and vibration of the trucks carrying the waste material will impact the right to live in peace and enjoyment, the pedestrian safety for the elderly and children and animals in the area will be impacted, the road safety in the narrow suburban streets and extended traffic delays will cause impact on residents. Cafe customers will be impacted. Why can't the waste material be removed at the future Barangaroo station or Victoria cross station or use Barges to remove the waste?