Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

I object to the NSW Government reclaiming the Balgowlah Golf Course and not returning it as a public golf course at the completion of the project. There is ample bushland that can be used for storage and construction 3 kms to the north-west of the project on the western edge of the Wakehurst Parkway. It is my view that this land should be used as the storage and construction site, leaving the Balgowlah Golf Club to be used by the local community.

My objection to the Beaches Tunnel is based on the unresolved issues below;

- the proposed tunnel is a major over-development destroying the natural environment and not encouraging any sustainable Human Behaviour change

- the construction of such a project is sending a message that is not aligned with local and global concern for the importance of protecting biodiversity and wildlife

- the resulting environmental damage to the Wakehurst Parkway / Burnt Bridge / Manly Dam catchment / Queenscliff lagoon ecosystems will be irreparable and long term

- the disregard for known induced demands - bigger roads means greater traffic, over development and the same problems will return within 2 years of the tunnel opening.

- More roads means a reliance on tolls to pay for them, ignoring a public transport priority focus on options and sustainable development

- A six story unfiltered stack with sports fields underneath would be a ticking time bomb for health impacts and subsequent legal compensation

- A massive development corridor will be unleashed creating more congestion, parking problems and unregulated environmental impact

- The new Covid world, with many people not commuting and subsequently working from home, is globally recognized as a major opportunity for a shift in planning thinking

- The Business Case does not justify the environmental destruction and massive spend for such a short term gain, with community feedback concerns being ignored

I am deeply concerned about the environmental impacts of the current proposal, especially as regards the water quality in Burnt Bridge Creek and Manly Dam.

These are vital environments for the local population, bringing beauty to a wide number of people and protecting vulnerable wildlife.

I do believe that the tunnel can accommodate these concerns, but the current EIS gives me great cause for concern.

Greater efforts should be made to protect these vital environments before work proceeds. I believe the Northern Beaches council shares these concerns and I urge the relevant officials in Major Projects to work with the Council to find a plausible solution.

I do not support the Beaches Link Tunnel. My concerns relate to both the construction phase and the ongoing phase.
1. The justification for the tunnel is outdated. The business case is limited, the cost is significant for minimal projected improvements on travel times. COVID19 has changed the way we worked with more people working from home yet the justification for building the tunnel is based on outdated travel data from preCOVID.
2. I have grave concerns about the negative impacts on Manly Dam, in regards to the loss of bushland at Wakehurst Parkway, impacts on wildlife and loss of habitat in addition to the loss of Balgowlah oval and golf course during the construction phase.
3. I have grave concerns about the negative impacts on Burnt Creek, changes to flows, water runoff and spill into the Queenscliff lagoon and pollution out onto the beach.
4. I have grave concerns about the negative impacts and danger of increased truck movements and traffic chaos during the construction phase of the tunnel build on the students and staff of the Balgowlah Boys High School in particular, but also in regards to other local primary schools like Manly West, North Balgowlah, Balgowlah Heights and Seaforth Public Schools, child care centres and local residents. With a build time of approximately 6 years some students could be impacted during their whole time in high school.
5. I have grave concerns about the negative impacts and affects of noise and air pollution during the construction phase of the tunnel build on the students and staff of the Balgowlah Boys High School in particular, but also in regards to other local primary schools like Manly West, North Balgowlah, Balgowlah Heights and Seaforth Public Schools, child care centres and local residents. With a build time of approximately 6 years some students could be impacted during their whole time in high school.
6. I have grave concerns about the ongoing negative affect of air pollution from the smoke stack once the tunnel has been built on the students and staff of the Balgowlah Boys High School in particular but also in regards to other local primary schools like Manly West, North Balgowlah, Balgowlah Heights and Seaforth Public Schools, child care centres and local residents. This will have significant negative impacts for the whole community into the future.
The government should be improving public transport (building train lines, bus routes and bike lanes) to improve movement around our cities, not encouraging car use by building a car tunnel. The cost is too great for the natural environment and the health and wellbeing of our community. We don't want this tunnel.

I object to the project on several grounds:
1) CONTAMINATION. The Flat Rock Reserve area used to be a dumping ground for waste material. Pollution has already been identified with high risk but there is insufficient analysis on the impact of disturbing this. A full Phase 2 Contamination Assesment need to be completed including publicly available testing data. This should be made available to everyone. The reserve is used extensively for walking tracks, playing fields and dog walking. All of this may become impossible if the contamination is released. The local council and Sydney Water have spent a great deal of effort in cleaning up Flat Rock creek to make it better for the people who use the area.
2) MASS TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES. There needs to be a comparative mass transit alternative assessment. The current tunnel will just encourage more cars and pollution. A well designed public transport system will reduce traffic and pollution as well as help make the city more pedestrian friendly as there will be less people driving to work. A tunnel for cars contradicts the State Government's target of net-zero emissions by 2050 . A metro line would help achieve this plus allow for development opportunities around stations, such as apartments to help relieve housing issues. It could also link into the North Sydney Metro, or Crows Nest Metro for an integrated system like seen in many major cities around the world.
3) A BUSINESS CASE. This should cover what improvements there would be to travel time, re-assess the local traffic impacts (to address Willoughby and North Sydney Councils concerns), and more details of costs.

I live in the area that will be most affected by the vibrations of large haulage vehicles. Our house was built in 1904, a beautiful example of Edwardian architecture and the thought of it being cracked and damaged by these vibrations is abhorrent.
Our household has three vulnerable residents. My husband has leukaemia and IGG1 immune deficiency, our handicapped son has multiple health issues and also poor immunity and I'm over 70 and have asthma. The prospect of breathing in contaminants from the disturbance and destruction of the old tip is very distressing for each of our household.

If it must go ahead - public transport is far more viable. Encouraging individual personal transport merely clogs existing roads and does not relieve congestion. It also inhibits the number of commuters to generally a maximum of 5 but more likely 1 or 2 occupants in a private vehicle. Rail can transport 7000 passengers an hour.
I implore you to re-consider this project.

The Baringa Bush Community Garden Committee have discussed the impact of the project and object for the reasons outlined in the attachment.

I object to this project.

Sydney is currently surviving a global pandemic but the long lasting impacts on Sydney and Australia are not yet certain - how will work-from-home patterns impact on congestion? How will the impacts of the reduced immigration and the reduction in the birth rate impact on housing and transport? I did not see how the impacts of COVID were addressed in EIS.

The Executive summary suggests that tollways and freeways are how the objectives of The Greater Sydney Commission's A Metropolis of Three Cities will be met. This is misleading - tollways and tunnels do not make a walkable, healthy city. This project invests millions in infrastructure dedicated to private cars. Encouraging private car use does not reduce congestion and pollution - which are the issues this project purports to respond to. The money would be better directed to:
- investing and maintaining the existing roads we have,
- upgrading and investment in cycleways that encourage alternative modes of transport, reduce congestion, reduce air pollution, improve health,
- upgrading and expanding existing public transport options,
- investment into research as to how autonomous cars will impact and make use of the current infrastructure.

Marion Terrill, of the Grattan Institute notes that since 2016, governments have signed up to 29 projects, each worth $500 million or more. Only six of the 29 had business cases completed at the time politicians made their commitment. The Executive summary makes no reference to how this project has investigated the impact of COVID on Sydney's residents. I object to millions of dollars being invested into a project that invests in old technologies, does not acknowledge the current challenges and will perpetuate the problems of Sydney.

We object to the construction of the Northern Beaches Tunnel for the following reasons:
1. Once the tunnel is operational access from our home in Adolphus Street Naremburn southbound to the Harbour Tunnel via Brook Street is eliminated and will require a slow and heavily trafficked trip via Garland and Willoughby Roads. The response that Brook Street still has access to the city and east via the Cahill Expressway is not apples for apples because the Cahill has a single lane for non-bus and taxi vehicles and is frequently the subject of long queues.
2. Northbound access from Harbour Tunnel to Adolphus via Brook Street exit is eliminated and will require a slow and heavily trafficked journey via Willoughby Road and Garland Road. As for the southbound situation use of the Cahill Expressway really only offers a single lane access to the Harbour Bridge which is much more congested than the Harbour Tunnel.
3. The Northern Beaches Tunnel under Adolphus Street Naremburn is stated to be at a depth of around 60 metres. Based on experience with other Sydney tunnels it will more than likely end up being at a much shallower depth thereby increasing the risk of damage to our home at 5 Adolphus Street.
We ask that the project be reconfigured to meet our objections.
Margaret and Rodger Williams

As a Cub Scout Leader with 1st Northbridge Sea Scouts, this will impact the water activities program I run significantly. Our Boatshed is next door to Northbridge Sailing Club and the proposed area at Clive park and Seaforth is right where we normally sail, canoe and kayak. Most of the training skills sessions I run involve a stop at Clive Park to teach shallow capsizes and conduct a range of water based assessments which are part of our outdoor adventure skills program. This requires a shallow body of water with access to a beach so cub scouts can drain and re-enter this boats after capsize. There is no other area near us that can be used to this important lesson. Northbridge baths does not permit canoes or kayaks which is for the safety of the swimmers who use the facility.

I’m also extremely concerned about the proposal to have an escorted transit through the middle. Our Sailing boat, a J24, is moored around near fig tree point. It would be impractical to go back and forth with our tinnie to collect the boat and again in the J24 multiple times to switch cub groups using an escort each time. The area of the coffer dams is the exact area where we usually conduct our sailing program and we do not have a suitable area elsewhere since the proposed relocation of moorings would be into the only other location we will have access to. It is not clear how long the area will be inaccessible to us and it appears that we will be fully locked out of the area for a significant number of months during dredging. I am extremely worried about the practicality of running a water program when there is no suitable area to run it for a number of years.

I urge you to make consideration of the number of community groups in this area which utilise this location for water activities. I would suggest that the area is fully accessible for use outside of normal building working hours and that the coffer dams are made wider horizontal to the land instead of so far out in the water channel to create a wider accessible waterway during the project. This would allow me and other scout leaders to run a water program in the evenings, Saturday afternoons and all day Sunday. It will also make it practical for all of the private boats moored in the area to get out through the transit area easily in order to head out to Sydney Harbour. The current design doesn’t seem to account for the fact that this waterway is rather busy on the weekends. To suggest escorting every boat is poorly thought out.

I also urge you to reconsider an extended closure of the transit zone during dredging in favour of perhaps dredging it in sections at a time to maintain a practical sized waterway for boats to transit through.

I object to the Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection for the following reasons:
1. Building more roads is an outdated way to manage traffic congestion;
2. The tunnel will destroy Burnt Bridge creek, flora and fauna. It will also destroy our environment at construction sites. This is unacceptable;
3. The tunnel is a short sighted solution that no modern government in the world would consider except ours;
4. Smoke stacks will destroy our air quality and put local residents at a high health risk;
5. The tunnel shows a complete disregard for the local community, the environment and any long term solution strategy;
6. Construction of the tunnel will destroy a large area of my suburn, create pollution and noise;
7. My families health is at risk for a tunnel that I will not use at the entrance is not on my route. I will however suffer from the pollution;
8. I am embarrassed to be lead by such a short sighted, old fashioned government that shows complete disregard for the environment and my family's health. The community does not want this. This is not a solution to traffic congestion. Sophisticated countries with educated and informed planner and designers are not building more roads and tunnels to deal with increasing populations.

·         There is no safe level of air pollution associated with road tunnel emissions.

 

·         Volume 2F of the EIS (Appendices I to K) p 69 states: “The available evidence does not suggest that there is a threshold below which health effects do not occur so there are likely to be health effects associated with background levels of PM 2.5 and PM 10 even where the concentrations are below the current guidelines”.

 

·         The EIS states it did not have sufficient data for current air quality statistics around the tunnel sites in Wakehurst (Seaforth) Balgowlah and Cammeray/Naremburn Volume 2F of the EIS (Appendices I to K) page 35.  It has chosen to use long term air quality monitoring statistics for Chullora, Earlwood and Liverpool – all highly polluted areas of Sydney.  It has then used these ‘statistics’ to show overall pollution/mortality increases in the currently unpolluted suburbs of Seaforth, Balgowlah etc are negligible.

 

·         This is not accepted scientific practice and renders this section of the EIS data useless.

 

·         Given the close proximity of numerous schools and preschools to the Beaches Links and Cammeray stacks, it is particularly important that the public (and politicians) can make reasonable conclusions about acceptable levels of risk this pollution presents to a vulnerable section of society. It must also be understood these children will also be living in the same locality, so will be exposed to these pollutants all day, every day. The EIS does not give accurate, current data to allow a decision of this magnitude to be made.

 

·         The precautionary principle must be applied to ensure the health of children across the project footprint.

 

·         Given all these uncertainties, it was not surprising current Premier Gladys Berejiklian said when in Opposition in 2008: “World’s best practice is to filter tunnels. Why won’t they (Labor) allow people to sleep at night, knowing their children aren’t inhaling toxins that could jeopardise their health now, or in the future?”

 

·         The NSW Legislative Council’s Public Accountability Committee report on the Impact of the WestConnex Project in 2018 recommended that; “The NSW Government install on all current and future motorway tunnels, filtrations systems in order to reduce the level of pollutants emitted from ventilation stacks.”

 

·         World’s best practice with tunnels of this (WHBLT) length show Spain, Japan and Norway all use filtered emission stacks.

 

·         It is clear no informed decision can be made on ‘statistics’ presented in the current EIS in regards to health outcomes from unfiltered emission stacks.

 

·         If Transport for NSW chooses not to present accurate and relevant ‘statistics’ for this very important issue, then it is imperative the tunnel stacks are filtered to ensure the safety of affected communities.

I attach my letter of STRONG OBJECTION to the proposal. Specifically the reasons for my objection, which are outlined in more the attachment, are the following:
a) Unjustifiable risks to the health and safety of local residents, particularly the young.
b) Impacts of long-term construction on residents
c) It will not solve transportation issues in the long term.
d) Irreversible destruction of environment and green spaces
e) Impact on conservation and heritage areas
f) The complete lack of adequate community consultation

I am making a personal submission to object to the Beaches Link EIS due to the following reasons:

1. Sydney needs better public transport infrastructure, not toll roads, and the money set aside to fund construction should be used to fund a Northern Beaches train line rather than the proposed toll road;

2. The construction entry point of the proposed tunnel at Flat Rock Gully will have a significant negative impact on the surrounding Pyalla St area where my family lives for an extended period (6+ years):

• Air pollution, including potentially carcinogenic fine dust particles like asbestos and hazardous chemicals from old dump sites, will be generated from both tunnel construction and vehicles transporting materials to and from the construction site, causing potential health issues for my family. In addition, when complete the projects 4 unfiltered smoke stacks will pour toxic fumes into the local environment near schools, playing fields and homes;

• Noise pollution, from both tunnel drilling and vehicles entering / leaving the construction site, will be a permanent 24/7 issue causing further potential stress and health related issues for my family;

• Vibrations, caused by tunnelling underneath the local area, will potentially cause damage to homes in the area, including my own on Pyalla St;

• Traffic in the local area will increase significantly causing potential road safety issues, with the ~90 trucks per hour entering / leaving the construction site together with construction workers vehicles putting further strain on an area that already has unsustainably high traffic flows, in particular during school pick up and peak hour periods;

• Parking will significantly worsen, with trucks and workers at the construction site using local residential streets, already clogged with city commuter and Northbridge Plaza worker vehicles, as parking lots to access the Flat Rock Gully site;

• Property prices in the local area will be significantly devalued due to the air and noise pollution, potential damage to homes cause by vibrations, traffic and parking issues over the duration of the construction period; and

• Destruction of the Flat Rock Gully ecosystem, with the removal of ~390 trees, washing of contaminated water down Flat Rock Creek and clearing of a significant land area covering ~10,000 square metres, destroying the local environment incorporating many native fauna and flora species and enjoyed by locals;

3. Local sports fields and amenities, including Willoughby Leisure Centre, Bicentennial Reserve Oval, Flat Rock Gully Reserve and Tunks Park will be unavailable for use during construction due to the site covering a significant area, combined with physical safety, air pollution and noise related issues forcing closing of adjacent facilities;

4. Lack of transparency / accountability justifying the Beaches Link Tunnel projects benefits, with no business case disclosed to the community or analysis completed for alternate options including the Northern Beaches to Chatswood Metro; and

5. Whilst not currently proposed, there is a material risk that a smoke stack will be permanently located at the Flat Rock Gully site on completion of the tunnel, causing potential long term health issues for my family from air pollution.

The Northern Beaches tunnel is not the infrastructure solution that Sydney needs, and my local community will suffer significantly during construction with no short or long term benefits if the proposed tunnel goes ahead.

I sincerely hope that you act in the best interest of the community and stop the Northern Beaches tunnel. However, if the tunnel does go ahead, to minimise impacts on local residential communities, I ask that you work with the RMS to move the proposed excavation entry point at Flat Rock Gully to the Artarmon Industrial area.

Yours sincerely

Matt Walton
3 Pyalla St, Northbridge
0457 529 318

I object to the Beaches Link tunnel on multiple grounds including
• the intense and negative impact on local communities during construction
• the risk to, and suffering of, school children forced to study over years next to major construction sites
• the failure of the design to include filtered emissions stacks and inadequate modelling of air quality locally
• the failure of the project to design in dedicated public transport lanes
• the widespread damage and destruction of the natural environment
• the project’s incompatibility with ‘net zero by 2050’ and numerous other greening and biodiversity policies and goals.
As a former Seaforth resident and now resident of Bayview, I would not use the tunnel. This is in large part because I object to private car based toll roads when public transport is not prioritised. I have also recently had the sad experience of witnessing the horrendous destruction of precious, majestic bushland during the widening of Mona Vale road and the impact of wildlife.
The Beaches Link will bring more of the same. For this reason, my submission focuses on:
Unacceptable impacts on Burnt Bridge Creek catchment and downstream to Manly
The proposed construction and operation of the tunnel will result in surface and ground water drawdown beneath the Burnt Bridge Creek and a reduction in base and surface flows of up 69 to 96 per cent (NBC). This would directly impact flora, fauna and downstream receiving waters, meaning the entire water system from Seaforth to Manly Lagoon and to the beaches of the Manly area will potentially be impacted. This EIS states: ‘The freshwater creek runs for about four kilometres and is a vital ecological corridor of regenerated habitat that provides a range of important habitats for a diversity of local flora and fauna’. EIS, Appendix O, pg 45. This includes a camp of endangered grey-headed flying foxes that rely on the creek and the retention dam in Balgowlah Golf Course for water. Northern Beaches Council says of the Burnt Bridge Creek Reserve: ‘The reserve is significant in terms of both ecological and community values. Ecologically the riparian corridor provides a habitat link between the coast and natural areas further inland. The protection and enhancement of the native riparian vegetation in the reserve is crucial for the movement of wildlife.’
Yet, the EIS pays little attention to such a significant impact on this creek systems, despite international and Australian research that highlights risks to ecosystems when tunnel construction affects ground and surface water. ‘Any changes in the ground water environment of any disturbances to the water balance of catchments may cause environmental impacts detrimental to the surrounding vegetation’ (Gokdemir et al, Advances in Water Resources, 133, 2019). The EIS provides no scientifically robust study analysis of the impacts across the catchment, within the creek and its riparian zone and downstream to Manly Lagoon and the Manly beaches.
The EIS says: ‘While these reductions could be considered significant, in particular for Burnt Bridge Creek and Quarry Creek, they are unlikely to result in a complete loss of aquatic habitat. Pools would be retained and there would still be high flows within the waterways immediately after rainfall events.’
Such a conclusion has no scientific basis. The removal of 96% of the water from a creek that supports aquatic life and a diverse riparian zone, including many species that rely on access to its waters, will have devastating impacts for ecosystems from Seaforth to Manly. It also fails to consider or investigate the implications of reduced water flow for the Manly Lagoon including reduced oxygenation and the impact on its aquatic life. The pools the EIS mentions would essentially be stagnant and, therefore, unable to support many forms of life.
By contrast Northern Beaches Council’s experts, in their (first) draft submission noted: ‘The EIS trivialises what would be significant hydrological and ecological impacts on Burnt Bridge Creek. The creek would essentially function as a storm water channel.’. The EIS fails to assess impacts downstream on Manly Lagoon including on endangered ecological communities. In a later iteration, NBC highlighted the need for a wide range of mitigating measures, none of which were detailed in the EIS.
While the EIS suggests further studies, these are not defined or detailed. It also very worrying that the EIS states: Where unacceptable ecological impacts are predicted, feasible and reasonable mitigation measures to address the impacts should be identified, incorporated into the detailed design, and implemented during construction. This does not constitute a commitment to do anything, as ‘feasible and reasonable’ are subjective terms and required design changes to protect this water systems may be judged as not feasible.
It appears the EIS has been rushed and that none of the necessary detailed studies have been done to even understand the environmental impacts of the ground water draw done, nor the subsequent work needed to design means of preventing serious ecological damage across an entire catchment and watercourse.
Of particular concern is the Balgowlah grey-headed flying fox roost: Balgowlah’s flying foxes are a nationally and state protected endangered species that rely on Burnt Bridge Creek and the water retention dam at Balgowlah Golf Course. Grey-headed flying foxes were included on a Federal Government list of 100 species requiring critical attention following the 2019/2020 bushfires, given the devastating loss of flora and fauna. Research also shows 30% of Australia's EPBC-listed threatened species live in urban areas. The Balgowlah flying fox camp is particularly important for two reasons. 1. Its coastal location means sea breezes usually keep maximum temperatures below 37-38 degrees C, the point at which flying foxes drop young, or themselves fall out of their roosts, with large die offs reported. 2. The colony’s proximity to large tracts of urban bush where they play a critical role as a keystone species responsible for night pollination and the maintenance of healthy genetic diversity.
Their camp lies in the vegetated area between Balgowlah Road and Burnt Bridge Creek Deviation, about 120 metres from the construction footprint. Potential noise impacts are noted in the EIS. The solution is listed as ‘Where feasible and reasonable, noise BL intensive works with the potential of impacting the Grey-headed Flying-fox camp (ie demolition involving rock hammering or resurfacing works) should be programmed to avoid September to February’. (19.6) The key issue here is the wording. ‘Where feasible and reasonable’ is not a requirement to protect this endangered species, it is an invitation to make a subjective judgement that may be swayed by financial priorities.
The NSW Government, through Save our Species, lists the key threats to Grey-headed flying foxes as loss, fragmentation and degradation of habitat, and widespread pervasive factors such as impacts of climate change and disease.
The Beaches Link project will hasten the loss of this endangered protected and ecologically vital grey-headed flying fox colony through extreme construction disturbances, loss of access to water due to the de-watering of the creek and the removal of the water retention dam at Balgowlah Golf Course and loss of habitat.
The EIS provides no credible evidence-based plan to suggest the endangered Grey-headed flying fox camp will be protected.
Other environmental concerns include:
• More than 12 ha of high value bushland will be destroyed with the widening of the Wakehurst Parkway from North Seaforth to the intersection of the Parkway with Warringah Road. This includes Sydney Water site (Bantry Bay Reservoirs) at Kirkwood Avenue which was saved at the 11th hour by the community from being sold off to developers in 2015. The NSW Government promised to return it intact to Manly Warringah War Memorial Park to compensate for the loss of rare bushland and biodiversity as a result of the Manly Vale Public School expansion. This promise has not been kept.
A Total Earth Care Biodiversity Study commissioned by Sydney Water in 2018 revealed that the diverse bushland on the site was home to many birds and animals - including the threatened and fragile Eastern Pygmy Possum. Another threatened species mentioned in their report was the Eastern Bent-wing bat - which was notably absent from the species listed in the Beaches Link EIS. The NSW Government is promising to revegetate and return this area back to the park afterwards, but it is not possible to recreate the complex tapestry of endemic flora species or the lost wildlife. Disturbing and removing the original topsoil means opening up the whole area to invasive weed invasion. Locating an industrial grade work site here would be disastrous for the environment.
• Because so much high quality bushland is to be destroyed and this bushland is home to a number of critically endangered animals and plants, the TfNSW is required to “swap” it on a like-for-like basis for equivalent bush. This “offset” method is impossible in a practical sense, because there are no known pockets of land equivalent in their range of fauna and flora to be destroyed by TfNSW in the Northern Beaches.

My family and I are devoted voluntary members of the Northbridge Sailing Club for the past 8 years. The Northbridge Sailing Club provides the opportunity for many new sailors who learn to sail in these beautiful and less busy part of Sydney Harbour. My 3 boys have grown up learning to sailing at Northbridge Sailing Club and my husband a devoted Junior Sailing Coordinator. We spend most weekends on the water throughout the year and this project will be cause huge disruption and safety issues for them to continue this activity. The lengthy timeline and required measures to build this project will mean that sailing activity in Middle Harbour with greatly limited, impacting all the learning and competitive sailing from the Northbridge Sailing Club.

I oppose the Beaches Link tunnel and support submissions from the Save Manly Dam Catchment Committee, Viable Transport Solutions and the Australian Conservation Foundation (Northern Beaches).
This project will cause extensive damage to our irreplaceable natural environment and puts numerous ecosystems at risk, including endangered grey-headed flying foxes.
It is incompatible with NSW’s stated goal of zero emissions by 2050 and various Council and NSW government policies and goals to reduce car use, improve public transport, sustainability and liveability
It fails to demonstrate the tunnel will reduce travel time, and there is evidence of additional congestion and slower local travel around tunnel entrances
It fails to provide up- to-date modelling on traffic, air quality and other important measures
The project will cause enormous disruption to communities, expose communities to multiple health risks, in particular children who will be forced to undertake many years of their education adjacent to large dusty, noisy construction sites.
It appears the EIS has been rushed and that none of the necessary detailed studies have been done to even understand the environmental impacts of the ground water draw down, nor the subsequent work needed to design means of preventing serious ecological damage across an entire catchment and watercourse.
I believe the information revealed in the EIS does not support the construction of the Beaches Link Tunnel and suggest TfNSW focus attentions on alternative transport options.

I strongly object as a resident of the Balgowlah area with the construction that is undoubtedly going to impact my family's and community's quality of life through dust, loud noise, vibration and heavy vehicle traffic going through our neighbourhood day and night. The 3,000 vehicles each day over all construction sites will impact us all considerably. This construction, over 7 years, day and night, is going to take a hard toll on the residents living close by. Over 4,000 homes will be subjected to excessive noise.
I also object to the impact the tunnel construction is going to have on the environment, including the movement of contaminated sediment to Clontarf and Middle harbour, causing pollution on the neighbouring beaches.
The discharge of 428,000 L per day of wastewater into Queenscliff Lagoon and beach resulting in health hazards to the community.
The reasons for the tunnel cannot ever warrant such a detrimental impact over a 7 year period.

As an environmental scientist, wildlife rescuer and carer, and resident of the Northern Beaches I am opposed to this project in the current form. It is presented as a fait-accompli rather than a considered project that examines the real impacts on residents and the environment. The known and unknown damage to the environment are not worth the proposed benefits. Even the proponent modelling within the project only states limited benefit to traffic along Military Rd in the long-term. Other transport experts have described the business case as poor. All evidence from previous road building shows traffic build up gets back to previous levels within a short period of time. Economic and air quality has been pointed out in many other submissions. My focus is on the massive loss of habitat.
As usual, government sees open space as not an asset for the community and other species but only space waiting to be developed. On top of the destruction of green corridor from Oxford Falls to Manly Dam that was caused by the Frenchs Forest Hospital, this is further loss (and well may be the tipping point) to open space and health of this urban bushland. The recent pandemic should have shown us the essential role open space plays for humans, not just the survival of other species. Yet you continue to remove it despite our current situation.
As scientists are pointing out massive environmental damage and loss of wildlife, the government continues ahead with damaging projects with the same way of thinking that has lead to this damage in the first place. Despite requirements to look at environmental impact, damage is ignored or there is a pretence there are offset options. There aren’t. Offsets are currently being used as a first option to do the damage that the proponent intends. It was designed as a last option when avoidance, minimisation or mitigation had been thoroughly explored. As we remove more and more trees and open space in our cities, to the detriment of other species and our own health, offsets are no longer available.
The damage to Manly Dam environs is unacceptable both during construction and long-term loss. Over 20 hectares is proposed to be cleared. The loss of mature trees is alarming and their services cannot be replaced even in 50 years. Replanting does not bring back the species loss nor is it particularly successful with many replanting projects recording over 40% of new plantings failing. Older trees not only have better carbon sequestration rates but provide better homes and food for wildlife. The idea of removing thousands of mature trees is insanity when we know we are dealing with serious escalation in climate change. Removal of mature flowering gums should NOT be allowed at all in this area as it will severely impact the Grey Headed Flying Fox permanent camp at Balgowlah (as will the construction noise). We have only recently come through starvation events from the drought, now these projects seem incapable with using real world, real-time changes that need to be considered.
Manly Dam needs increased buffer zones, not less space, as we are already seeing damage to trees , populations of fauna and water quality. Rescuers and bush regenerators are noting decreasing health of flora and fauna. This is probably the final blow in trying to maintain the health of this patch of bushland. We were dealing with increased road kill from upgrade of Hospital, but reported hits-by-car seems to have recently reduced largely due to impact on wildlife populations in the area. RMS own figures noted that removal of wallabies through current rate of vehicle kill would outdo the natural replacement rate.
Although Council and the government say they will protect our wildlife this has been proven not to be the case. Even high profile species like the koala, are still disappearing, largely because we will not do what is needed and that is to avoid further land clearing.
The Beaches link is poorly thought-out, simplistic and damaging proposal that will cause major detrimental impact on quantity and quality of our environment. There will be pollution, physical damage and indirect damage from loss of soil integrity and water impacts (as was quite clear from the recent upgrade to Manly Vale Public School). The tunnel itself will cause subsidence (as is the case with so many other tunnels occurring now) but the loss of green space and trees has not been costed properly in any way - the economic advantage our wildlife brings, the cost to rescuers, the cost to the wildlife itself and the economic benefits that green space and trees actually contribute

I am ver opposed to this project due to the significant impact to the native wildlife that live around the North Balgowlah and Wakehurst Parkway area. When driving on the Parkway there is already a huge amount of animals that are hit by cars and left on the side of the road, this development encroaches even further on their habitat! There should be large wildlife crossing like being implemented in the Mona vale road project to ensure our precious native wildlife is protected, even if this project is stopped. Where do you expect our wildlife to go if we continue to encroach on its habitat?
The unfiltered stacks near our homes are going to emit significant amounts of fumes right in our community.
I absolutely object to this project.