Paul Miller
Comment
Paul Miller
Comment
North Rocks
,
New South Wales
Message
see attached
Attachments
John Inshaw
Object
John Inshaw
Object
Galston
,
New South Wales
Message
see attached
Attachments
Lionel Huntington
Object
Lionel Huntington
Object
Wahroonga
,
New South Wales
Message
see attached
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
,
New South Wales
Message
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.
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.
Support
Support
,
New South Wales
Message
Dear Sirs,
I live in Waitara Av, Waitara.
I've read the material for & against including your "Community Update 5"
The tunnel is a teriffic idea and more power to you for building it. However, there is
a perception which has become a reality and nothing you say,show or do will alter that
...ever. So no matter what the cost you must filter the XXXX !
Regards,
I live in Waitara Av, Waitara.
I've read the material for & against including your "Community Update 5"
The tunnel is a teriffic idea and more power to you for building it. However, there is
a perception which has become a reality and nothing you say,show or do will alter that
...ever. So no matter what the cost you must filter the XXXX !
Regards,
Roland Churches
Comment
Roland Churches
Comment
Beecroft
,
New South Wales
Message
I have waded through a lot of the pdf large file but could not find the route taken to design the ventilation outlets. In particular, I find the document is deficient in permitting the reader to find the following:
1. wind rose patterns relevant to the south stack. Airport data is not relevant. Western data shows that there are periods of wind speed of less than 2km/hr, but these are averages and i could not find actual data from which still periods could be analysed for extent of pooling of polluted air, especially during times when cold, still air lies in the areas lower that the stack.
2. considerations leading to the determination of the design height of the stack could not be found.
3. the height of the stack appears to be 15 m plus the building height of 7m. a 22m height is very small to affect acceptable dispersion of particulate pollution, especially in still and low wind speed conditions.
It is recommended that the EIS is annotated with a layperson-friendly document that properly addresses the above shortcomings.
1. wind rose patterns relevant to the south stack. Airport data is not relevant. Western data shows that there are periods of wind speed of less than 2km/hr, but these are averages and i could not find actual data from which still periods could be analysed for extent of pooling of polluted air, especially during times when cold, still air lies in the areas lower that the stack.
2. considerations leading to the determination of the design height of the stack could not be found.
3. the height of the stack appears to be 15 m plus the building height of 7m. a 22m height is very small to affect acceptable dispersion of particulate pollution, especially in still and low wind speed conditions.
It is recommended that the EIS is annotated with a layperson-friendly document that properly addresses the above shortcomings.