Karis Yau
Object
Karis Yau
Object
Asquith
,
New South Wales
Message
Objection to the existing stack at Wahroonga
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Normanhurst
,
New South Wales
Message
The lack of ground water assessment in the EIS is of concern. The groundwater assessment in the EIS would be appropriate for a surface road, not a tunnel.
Given that NorthConnex will be one of largest tunnels in the world (in terms of length and cross-sectional area) and will be unlined, the potential for significant inflow of groundwater and the lowering of the groundwater table is very high. Impacts from significant inflow and drawdown can include settlement of the ground - resulting in damage to buildings, public infrastructure (such as sewers, water reticulation networks, roads) and other structures. In some cases this settlement can result in the catastrophic failure of the ground causing sink holes to develop, similar the Lane Cove Tunnel collapse. This is particularly a risk for NorthConnex as the tunnels are predominately underneath houses and other infrastructure.
The level of assessment presented in the EIS clearly does not meet the level of assessment required by the Director-General's Requirements.
A detailed assessment of groundwater impacts needs to be undertaken to ensure that the significant risks of this issue are addressed and mitigations are put in place.
Given that NorthConnex will be one of largest tunnels in the world (in terms of length and cross-sectional area) and will be unlined, the potential for significant inflow of groundwater and the lowering of the groundwater table is very high. Impacts from significant inflow and drawdown can include settlement of the ground - resulting in damage to buildings, public infrastructure (such as sewers, water reticulation networks, roads) and other structures. In some cases this settlement can result in the catastrophic failure of the ground causing sink holes to develop, similar the Lane Cove Tunnel collapse. This is particularly a risk for NorthConnex as the tunnels are predominately underneath houses and other infrastructure.
The level of assessment presented in the EIS clearly does not meet the level of assessment required by the Director-General's Requirements.
A detailed assessment of groundwater impacts needs to be undertaken to ensure that the significant risks of this issue are addressed and mitigations are put in place.
Jonathan Clifton
Object
Jonathan Clifton
Object
Turramurra
,
New South Wales
Message
I would like to put forward my objection to the proposed m2-m1 tunnel ventilation solution.
It will cause REAL health problems for those living and going to school nearby, including my children.
The proposed height of the stack is INCONSISTENT with those of other Sydney infrastructure tunnels.
Please continue reviewing further designs for this aspect of this much needed tunnel.
Sydney has a history of failed infrastructure planning - please make sure this tunnel is not added to the list.
It will cause REAL health problems for those living and going to school nearby, including my children.
The proposed height of the stack is INCONSISTENT with those of other Sydney infrastructure tunnels.
Please continue reviewing further designs for this aspect of this much needed tunnel.
Sydney has a history of failed infrastructure planning - please make sure this tunnel is not added to the list.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Wahroonga
,
New South Wales
Message
Please find below our submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.
Firstly we would like to state that we object to the project as described in the EIS.
We are a young family living in our home, which is positioned less than 400m from the proposed pollution stacks. Our home is a heritage item, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. We purchased this property to preserve a piece of history and also to raise our children in a safe and beautiful environment. Wahroonga is a suburb that boasts beautiful gardens and natural bush surroundings. The people who live here have high standards about quality of life. It is a suburb that primarily professionals choose to live in as it is a more expensive residential area to choose in Sydney due to the surrounding environment and quality of schools in this area. We are very concerned about the proposal of these pollution stacks and the impact it will have on destroying this beautiful place to live. We have 2 children who attend local schools in this area and we are concerned about the detrimental health effects these stacks pose to our family.
Although we do not oppose a solution to the traffic congestion issues on Pennant Hills Road and do support the solution of a tunnel being constructed, we strongly object to the current proposal.
There is a high level of responsibility in designing and building such a structure and the consequential effects it will have upon the environment and its residents. We believe that ultimately the main goal is to create a well-designed functional solution that is ecologically sustainable. It is of no use to build something that will cause disease and destruction to the environment and its residents. We expect that such proposals are in fact designed to work well for all the people and protect them and the environment from any potential harm, this is smart design, anything else is in fact a poor and inadequate solution. The design of this structure should be done with utmost ethical integrity. What is the point of spending all this money to create disharmony and dysfunction to the surrounding community. Spending extra money for a well functioning healthy solution to this problem is money well spent as it is likely to be less expensive in the long run.
The issue of stacks that emit toxic pollution is unacceptable, Anywhere. There should be a filtering system to prevent such pollution being released.
We 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, we are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are concerned that the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is cursory and unconvincing.
To address our concerns we 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.
We expect that this situation be reassessed and that a well designed, functional and ecologically sustainable solution is created, that addresses the above-mentioned items.
We look forward to a positive outcome.
Firstly we would like to state that we object to the project as described in the EIS.
We are a young family living in our home, which is positioned less than 400m from the proposed pollution stacks. Our home is a heritage item, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. We purchased this property to preserve a piece of history and also to raise our children in a safe and beautiful environment. Wahroonga is a suburb that boasts beautiful gardens and natural bush surroundings. The people who live here have high standards about quality of life. It is a suburb that primarily professionals choose to live in as it is a more expensive residential area to choose in Sydney due to the surrounding environment and quality of schools in this area. We are very concerned about the proposal of these pollution stacks and the impact it will have on destroying this beautiful place to live. We have 2 children who attend local schools in this area and we are concerned about the detrimental health effects these stacks pose to our family.
Although we do not oppose a solution to the traffic congestion issues on Pennant Hills Road and do support the solution of a tunnel being constructed, we strongly object to the current proposal.
There is a high level of responsibility in designing and building such a structure and the consequential effects it will have upon the environment and its residents. We believe that ultimately the main goal is to create a well-designed functional solution that is ecologically sustainable. It is of no use to build something that will cause disease and destruction to the environment and its residents. We expect that such proposals are in fact designed to work well for all the people and protect them and the environment from any potential harm, this is smart design, anything else is in fact a poor and inadequate solution. The design of this structure should be done with utmost ethical integrity. What is the point of spending all this money to create disharmony and dysfunction to the surrounding community. Spending extra money for a well functioning healthy solution to this problem is money well spent as it is likely to be less expensive in the long run.
The issue of stacks that emit toxic pollution is unacceptable, Anywhere. There should be a filtering system to prevent such pollution being released.
We 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, we are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are 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. We are concerned that the justification for not providing filtration for the stacks is cursory and unconvincing.
To address our concerns we 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.
We expect that this situation be reassessed and that a well designed, functional and ecologically sustainable solution is created, that addresses the above-mentioned items.
We look forward to a positive outcome.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
Warrawee
,
New South Wales
Message
Please find below my submission in response to the exhibition of the EIS for NorthConnex.
Firstly I wish to state that I object to the project as described in the EIS.
There are 2 major concerns with respect to the project that I believe are wholly unsustainable in this fay an age of environmental and health awareness.
The first issue is the placement of an unfiltered ventilation stack in the middle of the densely populated residential area of Wahronga with extremely close proximity to major schools and hospitals and aged care facilities. The health issues arising from this are clearly articulated in many large scale research studies on the impacts of air pollutants and unacceptable in this modern day, given our knowledge and understanding.
The second issue is the placement of the entry / exit to the tunnel which requires traffic to rise from both the M1 and the tunnel to exit the system. Traffic going uphill releases 4 to 5 times the exhaust pollution more than flat travel meaning that the amount of exhaust pollution being produced and extracted from the unfiltered Stack will be even higher due to this effect and construction design.
To address my concerns I request that the following options are undertaken:
1. Due to the significant health concerns and increased pollution due to the elevated linkage between the M1 and tunnel, I request that the department of planning does not approve the project in its current form.
2. I request that alternative options to ease congestion are considered. Suggestions to be considered should include but not be limited to the extension of the tunnel to exit in an area sufficiently far away from residential areas for pollution to disperse before reaching them, or efficient filtration (my understanding is this is not possible, but should be independently reviewed again) , or an orbital surface route that would avoid the issues this tunnel is causing and be a safer alternative for drivers.
Firstly I wish to state that I object to the project as described in the EIS.
There are 2 major concerns with respect to the project that I believe are wholly unsustainable in this fay an age of environmental and health awareness.
The first issue is the placement of an unfiltered ventilation stack in the middle of the densely populated residential area of Wahronga with extremely close proximity to major schools and hospitals and aged care facilities. The health issues arising from this are clearly articulated in many large scale research studies on the impacts of air pollutants and unacceptable in this modern day, given our knowledge and understanding.
The second issue is the placement of the entry / exit to the tunnel which requires traffic to rise from both the M1 and the tunnel to exit the system. Traffic going uphill releases 4 to 5 times the exhaust pollution more than flat travel meaning that the amount of exhaust pollution being produced and extracted from the unfiltered Stack will be even higher due to this effect and construction design.
To address my concerns I request that the following options are undertaken:
1. Due to the significant health concerns and increased pollution due to the elevated linkage between the M1 and tunnel, I request that the department of planning does not approve the project in its current form.
2. I request that alternative options to ease congestion are considered. Suggestions to be considered should include but not be limited to the extension of the tunnel to exit in an area sufficiently far away from residential areas for pollution to disperse before reaching them, or efficient filtration (my understanding is this is not possible, but should be independently reviewed again) , or an orbital surface route that would avoid the issues this tunnel is causing and be a safer alternative for drivers.
Jan Lancey
Object
Jan Lancey
Object
Wahroonga
,
New South Wales
Message
Please see attached document
Barbara Davis
Object
Barbara Davis
Object
Cheltenham
,
New South Wales
Message
I am concerned about the building of unfiltered stacks for the tunnel and the resulting pollution in surrounding suburbs.
But my main concern is that this money is yet again for car and truck infrastructure when we all know we should be building public rail and light rail and bike ways to reduce emissions. Climate change is real and transport accounts for 15%. Studies have shown that if you build more roads you just get more cars. More cars =more pollution above ground and below ground!
But my main concern is that this money is yet again for car and truck infrastructure when we all know we should be building public rail and light rail and bike ways to reduce emissions. Climate change is real and transport accounts for 15%. Studies have shown that if you build more roads you just get more cars. More cars =more pollution above ground and below ground!
Simon ZHOU
Object
Simon ZHOU
Object
Wahroonga
,
New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir/Madam,
I would like to state we OBJECT to the project as described in the EIS.
This project has 3 off 9km long lanes, and nearly 100,000 vehicles drive through everyday; please think about nearlly 10,000 children and high density community nearby, this project could be the worst thing in the history.
If it is all about money, please stop it, or add on filter facility and shift the stack to further north. our health and life can not be judged by money.
Simon
I would like to state we OBJECT to the project as described in the EIS.
This project has 3 off 9km long lanes, and nearly 100,000 vehicles drive through everyday; please think about nearlly 10,000 children and high density community nearby, this project could be the worst thing in the history.
If it is all about money, please stop it, or add on filter facility and shift the stack to further north. our health and life can not be judged by money.
Simon
zoy bamford
Object
zoy bamford
Object
carlingford
,
New South Wales
Message
I endorse the attached SCAPS GROUP SUBMISSION
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
North Turramurra
,
New South Wales
Message
9 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 I 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 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.
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX
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 I 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 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.
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX