Sydney Harbour Tunnel: A Critical Analysis
VerifiedAdded on 2020/05/08
|11
|3247
|83
AI Summary
This assignment delves into a critical analysis of the Sydney Harbour Tunnel, focusing on its construction, operation, and socio-economic implications. Students are tasked with examining various aspects including the tunnel's design and engineering challenges, the implementation of the toll system, public perception and user experience, financial models employed (BOT), and the associated risks involved. The assignment encourages an in-depth understanding of infrastructure projects from a multifaceted perspective.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running head: PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Principles of Project Management
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note
Principles of Project Management
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
1PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................2
2.0 Discussion..................................................................................................................................3
2.1 Background of the project.....................................................................................................3
2.2 Anticipated outcomes and benefits of the project..................................................................4
2.3 Strategic goals of the organization........................................................................................4
2.4 Project drivers........................................................................................................................5
2.5 Project assumption, issues and constraints............................................................................5
2.6 Broad risk associated in the project environment..................................................................6
2.7 Time and cost limitation of the project..................................................................................7
3.0 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................7
4.0 Reference List............................................................................................................................9
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................2
2.0 Discussion..................................................................................................................................3
2.1 Background of the project.....................................................................................................3
2.2 Anticipated outcomes and benefits of the project..................................................................4
2.3 Strategic goals of the organization........................................................................................4
2.4 Project drivers........................................................................................................................5
2.5 Project assumption, issues and constraints............................................................................5
2.6 Broad risk associated in the project environment..................................................................6
2.7 Time and cost limitation of the project..................................................................................7
3.0 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................7
4.0 Reference List............................................................................................................................9
2PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
1.0 Introduction
Arain et al. (2010) stated that a feasibility study is the assessment of the practicality of a
proposed plan or a project. Griffin et al. (2015) furthermore depicted that this study also
illustrates the success factor of a project and how the project is beneficial for the community.
The project that is considered in this assessment is Sydney Harbour Tunnel that was completed
and opened to traffic in August 1992. This tunnel is a twin-tube road tunnel in Sydney and the
tunnel joins Warringah Freeway to Cahill Expressway from north Sydney to the domain tunnel
(Black, 2014).
Image 1: Sydney Harbour Tunnel
(Source: Transfield.com.au, 2017)
This business report provides a detailed overview of the background of the project, its
anticipated outcomes and benefits and the strategic goals for implementing the project.
Moreover, some effective project drivers will also be discussed in details along with the project
assumptions, issues, constraints and validity of the project. The associated risk with the project is
also discussed that is associated with the project environment and some alternative solution will
also be illustrated. Lastly, the time and the cost limitation of the project will also be presented
and recommendations for future development will also be covered in this business report.
1.0 Introduction
Arain et al. (2010) stated that a feasibility study is the assessment of the practicality of a
proposed plan or a project. Griffin et al. (2015) furthermore depicted that this study also
illustrates the success factor of a project and how the project is beneficial for the community.
The project that is considered in this assessment is Sydney Harbour Tunnel that was completed
and opened to traffic in August 1992. This tunnel is a twin-tube road tunnel in Sydney and the
tunnel joins Warringah Freeway to Cahill Expressway from north Sydney to the domain tunnel
(Black, 2014).
Image 1: Sydney Harbour Tunnel
(Source: Transfield.com.au, 2017)
This business report provides a detailed overview of the background of the project, its
anticipated outcomes and benefits and the strategic goals for implementing the project.
Moreover, some effective project drivers will also be discussed in details along with the project
assumptions, issues, constraints and validity of the project. The associated risk with the project is
also discussed that is associated with the project environment and some alternative solution will
also be illustrated. Lastly, the time and the cost limitation of the project will also be presented
and recommendations for future development will also be covered in this business report.
3PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
2.0 Discussion
2.1 Background of the project
The Sydney Harbour Tunnel project was initiated through a joint partnership between
Kumagai Gumi and Transfield and is started from the year 1987 (Transfield.com.au, 2017). The
project was owned and operated by Sydney Harbour Tunnel Company (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017).
This project was considered as the first Build Own Operate Transfer (BOOT) project and total of
$750 million was financed for this tunnel project (Transfield.com.au, 2017).
Image 2: Harbour Tunnel map
(Source: Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017)
Earlier the plan for building an alternative cross-harbor route that was identified by
Sydney Orbital plan instead of Sydney Harbour Tunnel. The reason is that project was beyond
the scope of the Roads and Maritime budget (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). The project was
completed and opened for public in the ear 1992 and it is presently capable of carrying around
90,000 vehicles per day (Brooker & Uddin, 2011). One of the major significance of this project
is that it is the first underwater traffic tunnel linking both sides of the city and the “immersed
2.0 Discussion
2.1 Background of the project
The Sydney Harbour Tunnel project was initiated through a joint partnership between
Kumagai Gumi and Transfield and is started from the year 1987 (Transfield.com.au, 2017). The
project was owned and operated by Sydney Harbour Tunnel Company (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017).
This project was considered as the first Build Own Operate Transfer (BOOT) project and total of
$750 million was financed for this tunnel project (Transfield.com.au, 2017).
Image 2: Harbour Tunnel map
(Source: Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017)
Earlier the plan for building an alternative cross-harbor route that was identified by
Sydney Orbital plan instead of Sydney Harbour Tunnel. The reason is that project was beyond
the scope of the Roads and Maritime budget (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). The project was
completed and opened for public in the ear 1992 and it is presently capable of carrying around
90,000 vehicles per day (Brooker & Uddin, 2011). One of the major significance of this project
is that it is the first underwater traffic tunnel linking both sides of the city and the “immersed
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
4PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
tube technology” was implemented for creating concrete caissons so that the tunnel can float into
its position and lowered onto the sea level (Transfield.com.au, 2017).
2.2 Anticipated outcomes and benefits of the project
The major idea for the formulation of the Sydney Harbour Tunnel is to reduce the
congestion on the Sydney Harbour Bridge. The benefits of this tunnel program were witnessed
from two aspects- for road users and for public transport users. The reduced traffic congestion
allows the road users to travel faster without any delay in their journey. Tiong (1990)
furthermore discussed that travelers also mover relatively faster between Sydney's north and the
airport and it seamlessly links traffic flowing from the north of the harbour to airport routes
(Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). Moreover, the tunnel also links M5 East and M5 South-Western
motorways that improved the access between harbour crossings and Sydney's south-western
suburbs (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). The benefit that the public transport users get is that bus
services for the north of the harbor has been improvised as a separate bus lane on the Sydney
Harbour Bridge was built (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017).
The anticipation of the project is to attain high use of safe transportation in the bridge and
tunnel. During the implementation of the tunnel project the formulation of the bus lane was
planned for to attain improvement in city-bound bus services so that more people can travel with
efficiency. At that time the thought of less congestion on roads, better local air quality and fewer
carbon emissions were also consider.
2.3 Strategic goals of the organization
The strategic goal of the project is to built a tunnel below the Sydney Harbour Bridge is
to provide convenience to the local people and reduce the traffic on the bridge. Moreover, new
technology was planned to use in the formulation of this bridge. This can be witnessed through
the fact that the tunnel was fully operated with both e-TAG and e-pass video tolling
arrangements in use (Haughton & McManus, 2012). This technology helps in reducing the traffic
heading towards the electronic gantries. Another key feature of the project is the removal of the
toll booth along for the redundant services and infrastructure. Tiong & Alum (1997) also
highlight that, the intersection of York and Grosvenor streets was also the strategic goal of the
project.
tube technology” was implemented for creating concrete caissons so that the tunnel can float into
its position and lowered onto the sea level (Transfield.com.au, 2017).
2.2 Anticipated outcomes and benefits of the project
The major idea for the formulation of the Sydney Harbour Tunnel is to reduce the
congestion on the Sydney Harbour Bridge. The benefits of this tunnel program were witnessed
from two aspects- for road users and for public transport users. The reduced traffic congestion
allows the road users to travel faster without any delay in their journey. Tiong (1990)
furthermore discussed that travelers also mover relatively faster between Sydney's north and the
airport and it seamlessly links traffic flowing from the north of the harbour to airport routes
(Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). Moreover, the tunnel also links M5 East and M5 South-Western
motorways that improved the access between harbour crossings and Sydney's south-western
suburbs (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). The benefit that the public transport users get is that bus
services for the north of the harbor has been improvised as a separate bus lane on the Sydney
Harbour Bridge was built (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017).
The anticipation of the project is to attain high use of safe transportation in the bridge and
tunnel. During the implementation of the tunnel project the formulation of the bus lane was
planned for to attain improvement in city-bound bus services so that more people can travel with
efficiency. At that time the thought of less congestion on roads, better local air quality and fewer
carbon emissions were also consider.
2.3 Strategic goals of the organization
The strategic goal of the project is to built a tunnel below the Sydney Harbour Bridge is
to provide convenience to the local people and reduce the traffic on the bridge. Moreover, new
technology was planned to use in the formulation of this bridge. This can be witnessed through
the fact that the tunnel was fully operated with both e-TAG and e-pass video tolling
arrangements in use (Haughton & McManus, 2012). This technology helps in reducing the traffic
heading towards the electronic gantries. Another key feature of the project is the removal of the
toll booth along for the redundant services and infrastructure. Tiong & Alum (1997) also
highlight that, the intersection of York and Grosvenor streets was also the strategic goal of the
project.
5PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
2.4 Project drivers
Project drivers are the aspect through which a project runs attained its objectives and
serve the desired task for which the project is formulated (Phibbs, 2008). It is mentioned that in
order to make the tunnel float on its position above the sea level, immersed tube technology was
utilized for creating concrete caissons (Burns et al., 2013). Moreover, in order to handle the
traffic, the Trantek MST had implemented the technology of reliable rebroadcast system. In
recent times, the project engineers intend to implement intelligent transport system and thus they
have chosen RFI technology. Pells (2002) stated that the M/FM radio rebroadcast system
incorporated for the tunnel is vital as it allow the tunnel supervisors to handle the situation inside
the tunnel and severe accidents can be overcome. Moreover, McLoughlin (2000) depicted that
the RFI system offers a flexible rebroadcast system that includes effective system design of the
tunnel, Factory acceptance testing (FAT), RF surveys, Site acceptance testing (SAT) and
coverage testing.
Another project driver was security maintenance of the tunnel. Proper ventilation,,
emergency exits in case of fire and enough exhausts are also presents in the tunnel. This
technology advancement considered as a crucial project. The length of the tunnel was also
planned to made up of three sections- twin 900-metre on the north shore, twin 400-metre on the
south shore and a 960-metre immersed tube configuration (Quiggin, 2002).
Strong engineering can also be considered as an important project drivers and it can be
witnessed through eight precast concrete units (Ashton et al., 2001). During the construction,
prior to the arrival of the immersed tube (IMT) structure, a trench was dredged so that the IMT
can be lowered into the trench supported by the system of control towers and pontoons.
2.5 Project assumption, issues and constraints
The assumption of the project is to create convenience to the local people so that they can
travel without any problem. However, Gee et al. (2002) argued that there are some adversity that
rises due to the formulation of the projects. One such project is air pollution that exhausted from
the top of the northern pylon of the Sydney Bridge. The issue was that continuous amount of
fresh air has to be supplied inside the tunnel and thus the tunnel was designed so that it can
intake fresh air from air intake structure located in Bradfield Park. However, sometimes traffic
has to be controlled for reducing the adverse impact of the air quality. Yamaguchi et al. (2001)
2.4 Project drivers
Project drivers are the aspect through which a project runs attained its objectives and
serve the desired task for which the project is formulated (Phibbs, 2008). It is mentioned that in
order to make the tunnel float on its position above the sea level, immersed tube technology was
utilized for creating concrete caissons (Burns et al., 2013). Moreover, in order to handle the
traffic, the Trantek MST had implemented the technology of reliable rebroadcast system. In
recent times, the project engineers intend to implement intelligent transport system and thus they
have chosen RFI technology. Pells (2002) stated that the M/FM radio rebroadcast system
incorporated for the tunnel is vital as it allow the tunnel supervisors to handle the situation inside
the tunnel and severe accidents can be overcome. Moreover, McLoughlin (2000) depicted that
the RFI system offers a flexible rebroadcast system that includes effective system design of the
tunnel, Factory acceptance testing (FAT), RF surveys, Site acceptance testing (SAT) and
coverage testing.
Another project driver was security maintenance of the tunnel. Proper ventilation,,
emergency exits in case of fire and enough exhausts are also presents in the tunnel. This
technology advancement considered as a crucial project. The length of the tunnel was also
planned to made up of three sections- twin 900-metre on the north shore, twin 400-metre on the
south shore and a 960-metre immersed tube configuration (Quiggin, 2002).
Strong engineering can also be considered as an important project drivers and it can be
witnessed through eight precast concrete units (Ashton et al., 2001). During the construction,
prior to the arrival of the immersed tube (IMT) structure, a trench was dredged so that the IMT
can be lowered into the trench supported by the system of control towers and pontoons.
2.5 Project assumption, issues and constraints
The assumption of the project is to create convenience to the local people so that they can
travel without any problem. However, Gee et al. (2002) argued that there are some adversity that
rises due to the formulation of the projects. One such project is air pollution that exhausted from
the top of the northern pylon of the Sydney Bridge. The issue was that continuous amount of
fresh air has to be supplied inside the tunnel and thus the tunnel was designed so that it can
intake fresh air from air intake structure located in Bradfield Park. However, sometimes traffic
has to be controlled for reducing the adverse impact of the air quality. Yamaguchi et al. (2001)
6PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
also highlighted that the Department of Environment and Planning, Australia also stated that the
regional air quality is going to be worse in presence of tunnel compared to the absence of the
same tunnel. Moreover, another issue was the alienation of Parkland that the formulation of the
bridge results in damage of visibility of the park. Deforestation will hamper the beauty of the
park. Additionally, there was marine impact also that caused due to dredging and blasting on the
Harbour bottom. The EIS also argued that the construction of the tunnel will results in loss of
marine diversity and some sediments from construction also results in dispersal of toxic waste.
Newman (2014) also stated that the level of the heavy metals in the marine will also rise that
may affect the marine animals and their growth.
The constraints that is taken by the authority is the using eco-friendly materials and built
the tunnel with long-lasting technology so that the damage should be one time loss and no extra
effort should have to put in overcoming the adversity. In addition to that, a committee was set up
so that the progress of the tunnel can be evaluated efficiently.
2.6 Broad risk associated in the project environment
Risk of accidents and fire are the major risk that is associated in the project environment.
(Bjelland & Aven, 2013) explains that project risk related to flow of financial resources and
timing is also considered as a broader risk of a project. In recent times, there was a tunnel
collision on the Sydney Harbour Tunnel that results in delay. The reason was the accident
between a car and a truck and due to police operation on Cumberland Hwy, the traffic in the
tunnel stays for longer time (Dailytelegraph.com.au, 2017). Moreover, fire accidents also
occurred in the tunnel and this incidence can be witnessed through the fire occurred from a truck
accident. The truck was diverted while crossing a car and turned over that result in huge fire. The
adversity results in heavy traffic along the Gore Hill Freeway and it was queued over 3
kilometers (News.com.au, 2017). In previous tie, there was not arrangement for the identification
of the huge accident in the initial stage. However, in recent time, the entire tunnel is equipped
with GPS services so that the tunnel management accesses the activity of the tunnel effectively.
Moreover, in the year 2014, traffic also comes to a standstill in Sydney Harbour Tunnel after a
car catches on fire (Dailymail.co.uk, 2017).
also highlighted that the Department of Environment and Planning, Australia also stated that the
regional air quality is going to be worse in presence of tunnel compared to the absence of the
same tunnel. Moreover, another issue was the alienation of Parkland that the formulation of the
bridge results in damage of visibility of the park. Deforestation will hamper the beauty of the
park. Additionally, there was marine impact also that caused due to dredging and blasting on the
Harbour bottom. The EIS also argued that the construction of the tunnel will results in loss of
marine diversity and some sediments from construction also results in dispersal of toxic waste.
Newman (2014) also stated that the level of the heavy metals in the marine will also rise that
may affect the marine animals and their growth.
The constraints that is taken by the authority is the using eco-friendly materials and built
the tunnel with long-lasting technology so that the damage should be one time loss and no extra
effort should have to put in overcoming the adversity. In addition to that, a committee was set up
so that the progress of the tunnel can be evaluated efficiently.
2.6 Broad risk associated in the project environment
Risk of accidents and fire are the major risk that is associated in the project environment.
(Bjelland & Aven, 2013) explains that project risk related to flow of financial resources and
timing is also considered as a broader risk of a project. In recent times, there was a tunnel
collision on the Sydney Harbour Tunnel that results in delay. The reason was the accident
between a car and a truck and due to police operation on Cumberland Hwy, the traffic in the
tunnel stays for longer time (Dailytelegraph.com.au, 2017). Moreover, fire accidents also
occurred in the tunnel and this incidence can be witnessed through the fire occurred from a truck
accident. The truck was diverted while crossing a car and turned over that result in huge fire. The
adversity results in heavy traffic along the Gore Hill Freeway and it was queued over 3
kilometers (News.com.au, 2017). In previous tie, there was not arrangement for the identification
of the huge accident in the initial stage. However, in recent time, the entire tunnel is equipped
with GPS services so that the tunnel management accesses the activity of the tunnel effectively.
Moreover, in the year 2014, traffic also comes to a standstill in Sydney Harbour Tunnel after a
car catches on fire (Dailymail.co.uk, 2017).
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
7PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
2.7 Time and cost limitation of the project
The time taken for the completing the project was 5 years (1988- 1992) and the total cost
that was invested in completing the project was estimated to be $401 million per year in the year
1986 (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). It was also estimated that $10.6 million amount will also be
invested per year for the maintenance and operation of the tunnel (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017).
However, the financial resources come to shortage and the entire project was completed in $738
million according to the data of Roads and Traffic Authority (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). Yusuf et
al. (2014) argued that the extra cost that was incorporate while building the tunnel has to be paid
by the users, who use the tunnel in form of toll taxes. Moreover, the tunnel was supposed to be
financed privately by Transfield-Kumagai but some experts argued that the actual funding was
raised from road users from the Bridge and Tunnel toll (Khan, 2013). This incident resulted in
greater disappointment among the local people and other users of the tunnel.
3.0 Conclusion
This assessment highlights the feasibility study of an Australian project. The project that
is taken into consideration is the Sydney Harbour Tunnel that was completed in August 1992.
The planning of the tunnel was initiated in 1986 and the work for the project has been started in
the year 1988. It is found from the assessment that the formulation of the tunnel was made for
the convenience of the road users and to reduce the congestion in the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
The two issues and risk that are highlighted in the assessment are the project risk and the security
risk. In addition to that, the tunnel also impacts the environment in both ways- deforestation of
trees in a park and loss of marine animals due to under water due to dredging and blasting on the
Harbour bottom. It is also found that in traditional days, the tunnel was not equipped with
modern technology but in recent times, technologies like RFI system factory acceptance testing
(FAT), RF surveys, Site acceptance testing (SAT) and coverage testing was taken into
consideration. Moreover, GRS system in also incorporated in the tunnel so that the activities
inside the tunnel can be assessed and any adversity can be resolved in the initial stage. However,
the tunnel was built based on the technology of immersed tube technology that makes the tunnel
floating on its position in its position. Appropriate emergency exit and ventilation arrangement
was also planned.
2.7 Time and cost limitation of the project
The time taken for the completing the project was 5 years (1988- 1992) and the total cost
that was invested in completing the project was estimated to be $401 million per year in the year
1986 (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). It was also estimated that $10.6 million amount will also be
invested per year for the maintenance and operation of the tunnel (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017).
However, the financial resources come to shortage and the entire project was completed in $738
million according to the data of Roads and Traffic Authority (Rms.nsw.gov.au, 2017). Yusuf et
al. (2014) argued that the extra cost that was incorporate while building the tunnel has to be paid
by the users, who use the tunnel in form of toll taxes. Moreover, the tunnel was supposed to be
financed privately by Transfield-Kumagai but some experts argued that the actual funding was
raised from road users from the Bridge and Tunnel toll (Khan, 2013). This incident resulted in
greater disappointment among the local people and other users of the tunnel.
3.0 Conclusion
This assessment highlights the feasibility study of an Australian project. The project that
is taken into consideration is the Sydney Harbour Tunnel that was completed in August 1992.
The planning of the tunnel was initiated in 1986 and the work for the project has been started in
the year 1988. It is found from the assessment that the formulation of the tunnel was made for
the convenience of the road users and to reduce the congestion in the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
The two issues and risk that are highlighted in the assessment are the project risk and the security
risk. In addition to that, the tunnel also impacts the environment in both ways- deforestation of
trees in a park and loss of marine animals due to under water due to dredging and blasting on the
Harbour bottom. It is also found that in traditional days, the tunnel was not equipped with
modern technology but in recent times, technologies like RFI system factory acceptance testing
(FAT), RF surveys, Site acceptance testing (SAT) and coverage testing was taken into
consideration. Moreover, GRS system in also incorporated in the tunnel so that the activities
inside the tunnel can be assessed and any adversity can be resolved in the initial stage. However,
the tunnel was built based on the technology of immersed tube technology that makes the tunnel
floating on its position in its position. Appropriate emergency exit and ventilation arrangement
was also planned.
8PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
9PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
4.0 Reference List
Arain, M., Campbell, M. J., Cooper, C. L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2010). What is a pilot or
feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy. BMC medical
research methodology, 10(1), 67.
Ashton, G. B., Gee, R. A., Groves, P. N., & Warren, S. T. (2001). Northside Storage Tunnel
Project, Sydney: tunnelling and groundwater control beneath the middle harbour. In 2001
Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conference (pp. 593-605).
Bjelland, H., & Aven, T. (2013). Treatment of uncertainty in risk assessments in the Rogfast
road tunnel project. Safety science, 55, 34-44.
Black, J. (2014). Traffic risk in the Australian toll road sector. Public Infrastructure Bulletin,
1(9), 3.
Brooker, T., & Uddin, A. (2011, September). The Future Inner Sydney Light Rail Network. In
Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF), 34th, 2011, Adelaide, South Australia,
Australia (Vol. 34, No. 0024).
Burns, P., Stevens, G., Sandy, K., Dix, A., Raphael, B., & Allen, B. (2013). Human behaviour
during an evacuation scenario in the Sydney Harbour Tunnel. Australian Journal of
Emergency Management, The, 28(1), 20.
Dailymail.co.uk. (2017). Traffic jam Sydney Harbour Tunnel car fire. [online] Available at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4239038/Traffic-jam-Sydney-Harbour-Tunnel-
car-fire.html. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Dailytelegraph.com.au. (2017). Sydney Harbour Tunnel collision stops traffic, causes delays.
[online] Available at: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/sydney-harbour-
tunnel-collision-stops-traffic-causes-delays/news-story/
a13228572b0f93dc7da5aa858d3294ff. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Gee, R. A., Parker, C. J., & Cuttler, R. J. (2002, March). Northside storage tunnel, Sydney:
investigation, design and construction. In 28th ITA General Assembly and World
Tunnelling Congress, Sydney.
Griffin, D. W. P., Mirza, O., Kwok, K., & Kaewunruen, S. (2015). Finite element modelling of
modular precast composites for railway track support structure: A battle to save Sydney
Harbour Bridge. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, 16(2), 150-168.
4.0 Reference List
Arain, M., Campbell, M. J., Cooper, C. L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2010). What is a pilot or
feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy. BMC medical
research methodology, 10(1), 67.
Ashton, G. B., Gee, R. A., Groves, P. N., & Warren, S. T. (2001). Northside Storage Tunnel
Project, Sydney: tunnelling and groundwater control beneath the middle harbour. In 2001
Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conference (pp. 593-605).
Bjelland, H., & Aven, T. (2013). Treatment of uncertainty in risk assessments in the Rogfast
road tunnel project. Safety science, 55, 34-44.
Black, J. (2014). Traffic risk in the Australian toll road sector. Public Infrastructure Bulletin,
1(9), 3.
Brooker, T., & Uddin, A. (2011, September). The Future Inner Sydney Light Rail Network. In
Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF), 34th, 2011, Adelaide, South Australia,
Australia (Vol. 34, No. 0024).
Burns, P., Stevens, G., Sandy, K., Dix, A., Raphael, B., & Allen, B. (2013). Human behaviour
during an evacuation scenario in the Sydney Harbour Tunnel. Australian Journal of
Emergency Management, The, 28(1), 20.
Dailymail.co.uk. (2017). Traffic jam Sydney Harbour Tunnel car fire. [online] Available at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4239038/Traffic-jam-Sydney-Harbour-Tunnel-
car-fire.html. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Dailytelegraph.com.au. (2017). Sydney Harbour Tunnel collision stops traffic, causes delays.
[online] Available at: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/sydney-harbour-
tunnel-collision-stops-traffic-causes-delays/news-story/
a13228572b0f93dc7da5aa858d3294ff. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Gee, R. A., Parker, C. J., & Cuttler, R. J. (2002, March). Northside storage tunnel, Sydney:
investigation, design and construction. In 28th ITA General Assembly and World
Tunnelling Congress, Sydney.
Griffin, D. W. P., Mirza, O., Kwok, K., & Kaewunruen, S. (2015). Finite element modelling of
modular precast composites for railway track support structure: A battle to save Sydney
Harbour Bridge. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, 16(2), 150-168.
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
10PRINCIPLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Haughton, G., & McManus, P. (2012). Neoliberal experiments with urban infrastructure: the
Cross City Tunnel, Sydney. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36(1),
90-105.
Khan, A. M. (2013). Risk factors in toll road life cycle analysis. Transportmetrica A: Transport
Science, 9(5), 408-428.
McLoughlin, L. C. (2000). Shaping Sydney Harbour: sedimentation, dredging and reclamation
1788-1990s. Australian Geographer, 31(2), 183-208.
Newman, M. (2014). High speed rail in Australia: a case study for a Sydney-Wollongong link.
News.com.au. (2017). Truck fire closes Sydney Harbour Tunnel. [online] Available at:
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/truck-fire-closes-sydney-harbour-
tunnel/news-story/3bd9b550aa7dd8fd6c103ed80aa3a7a2. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Pells, P. J. N. (2002). Developments in the design of tunnels and caverns in the Triassic rocks of
the Sydney region. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 39(5),
569-587.
Phibbs, P. (2008). Driving alone: Sydney's Cross City Tunnel. Built environment, 34(3), 364-
374.
Quiggin, J. (2002). Private financing of public infrastructure. Dissent, 8, 13-17.
Rms.nsw.gov.au. (2017). Harbour tunnel - completed. [online] Available at:
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/projects/sydney-inner/harbour-tunnel.html. [Accessed 13
Oct. 2017].
Tiong, R. L. (1990). Comparative study of BOT projects. Journal of Management in
Engineering, 6(1), 107-122.
Tiong, R. L., & Alum, J. (1997). Financial commitments for BOT projects. International Journal
of Project Management, 15(2), 73-78.
Transfield.com.au. (2017). Sydney Harbour Tunnel. [online] Available at:
http://www.transfield.com.au/sydney-harbour-tunnel. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Yamaguchi, H., Uher, T. E., & Runeson, G. (2001, September). RISK allocation in PFI projects.
In Proceedings of 17th ARCOM Annual Conference, University of Salford, UK.
Yusuf, J. E. W., O’Connell, L., & Anuar, K. A. (2014). For whom the tunnel be tolled: A four-
factor model for explaining willingness-to-pay tolls. Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice, 59, 13-21.
Haughton, G., & McManus, P. (2012). Neoliberal experiments with urban infrastructure: the
Cross City Tunnel, Sydney. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36(1),
90-105.
Khan, A. M. (2013). Risk factors in toll road life cycle analysis. Transportmetrica A: Transport
Science, 9(5), 408-428.
McLoughlin, L. C. (2000). Shaping Sydney Harbour: sedimentation, dredging and reclamation
1788-1990s. Australian Geographer, 31(2), 183-208.
Newman, M. (2014). High speed rail in Australia: a case study for a Sydney-Wollongong link.
News.com.au. (2017). Truck fire closes Sydney Harbour Tunnel. [online] Available at:
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/truck-fire-closes-sydney-harbour-
tunnel/news-story/3bd9b550aa7dd8fd6c103ed80aa3a7a2. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Pells, P. J. N. (2002). Developments in the design of tunnels and caverns in the Triassic rocks of
the Sydney region. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 39(5),
569-587.
Phibbs, P. (2008). Driving alone: Sydney's Cross City Tunnel. Built environment, 34(3), 364-
374.
Quiggin, J. (2002). Private financing of public infrastructure. Dissent, 8, 13-17.
Rms.nsw.gov.au. (2017). Harbour tunnel - completed. [online] Available at:
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/projects/sydney-inner/harbour-tunnel.html. [Accessed 13
Oct. 2017].
Tiong, R. L. (1990). Comparative study of BOT projects. Journal of Management in
Engineering, 6(1), 107-122.
Tiong, R. L., & Alum, J. (1997). Financial commitments for BOT projects. International Journal
of Project Management, 15(2), 73-78.
Transfield.com.au. (2017). Sydney Harbour Tunnel. [online] Available at:
http://www.transfield.com.au/sydney-harbour-tunnel. [Accessed 13 Oct. 2017].
Yamaguchi, H., Uher, T. E., & Runeson, G. (2001, September). RISK allocation in PFI projects.
In Proceedings of 17th ARCOM Annual Conference, University of Salford, UK.
Yusuf, J. E. W., O’Connell, L., & Anuar, K. A. (2014). For whom the tunnel be tolled: A four-
factor model for explaining willingness-to-pay tolls. Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice, 59, 13-21.
1 out of 11
Your All-in-One AI-Powered Toolkit for Academic Success.
+13062052269
info@desklib.com
Available 24*7 on WhatsApp / Email
Unlock your academic potential
© 2024 | Zucol Services PVT LTD | All rights reserved.