Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

I strongly object to the project as it is a serious threat to the ecosystem and the environmental impacts as per the EIS are grave. Please read the attached letter to understand various points I disagree with.

I strongly object to the removal of trees on the Balgowlah golf course. Every tree proposed for removal should be fully reviewed and substantial reasons given in writing to state why they should be removed.
Specifically Tree numbers 765, 20322, 20321, 20320, 20323, 20325, 20330, 20331, 20332 - please provide a full explanation as to why these need to be removed as quoted in your design documentation, "avoid locating infrastructure including ancillary facilities adjoining residential areas and justify where this cannot be achieved". I object to the removal of these trees. We are impacted local receivers of the project, retention would contribute to the reduction in impact of construction and traffic noise and provide continued privacy for residential housing.

I object to the overall Beaches Link tunnel project as well as to specific environmental impacts at the Beaches end of the project.

Overall sustainability and climate impacts
In a time of unprecedented species extinction and dangerous global climate change the tunnel is a politically aggressive, short sighted and outdated transport solution which will wrought permanent and terrible damage on our local Northern Beaches environment. It will ultimately encourage more vehicles onto roads and into the Northern Beaches area while lining the pockets of giant toll road network operators to the detriment of the citizens, local ecosystems and waterways of the Sydney area. Further to that it will also markedly decrease the quality of life experienced by the local communities of North Balgowlah, Seaforth and Balgowlah in particular.

Also in light of our recent and ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic, we have, both at the greater metro Sydney and suburb level, been reminded of how precious our local green spaces and remnant wild places are in the areas where we live. We have also been reminded at how quickly things can change and how working from home options and reduced commutes are going to be an increasing trend in our communities. I suggest that the business case and traffic modelling for the tunnel are deeply flawed and look with cynicism at the recent cuts to bus routes servicing the area forcing people into cars.

Cities world wide are reducing car use and promoting local living and green space options. What are the politicians and planners in Sydney thinking?

Manly Dam (Manly Warringal Memorial Park)
I object to the ecological damage that will occur to the Manly Dam park and on the other side of the Wakehurst Parkway too into Garigal National Park.

I object to 20.92 hectares of threatened species habitat including endangered Duffy’s Forest habitat will be destroyed including the removal of some 2000 trees.

It is unacceptable that the ex Sydney Water site at Seaforth, that was promised to be returned to Manly Dam, is earmarked for “grubbing, topsoil stripping and bulk earthworks” as a construction support area and then later remediation for return to Manly Dam. This is the equivalent of borrowing someone’s family member for a while and then returning their limp and flayed body after torturing them. There will be nothing of the original biodiversity value left.

I object to earth works and clearing at the top of sensitive water catchments feeding Manly Dam and associated creeks threatening water quality in the last place humans in Sydney can go safely swimming in a freshwater lake as well as threatening the fauna such as the Climbing Galaxis fish.

The construction and operation of a 4 lane, 40 m wide freeway (Wakehurst Parkway) across a ridge that is not wide enough to accommodate it will lead to increased nutrient, sediment and chemical loads, increased turbidity which also leads to increased algal blooms and eutrophication in the Manly Dam waterways. This catchment drains to the local beaches, Queenscliff and these impacts will travel down the catchment.

Not considered in the EIS is the issue of increased microplastic load in the catchment. It is estimated that microplastics associated with the wear and tear of synthetic rubber of vehicle tyres could account for some 40% of microplastic loads in waterways – we do not understand the impacts associated with these styrene – butadiene rubber particles.


Manly Dam was gazetted as a State Park in 2017 in order to strengthen it’s conservation values. This project does nothing but denigrate and destroy conservation values of the park.

It is a living War Memorial and the tunnel construction and ongoing operation will be a grave desecration of this site. The Northern Beaches Council is currently nominating the Manly Warringah Memorial Park for National Heritage listing due to it’s cultural and environmental values.

The 40m wide 4 lane extension of the Wakehurst Parkway is also untenable in terms of dividing fauna and to a lesser extent flora populations either side, effectively genetically isolating them and thereby weakening their genetic resilience – a few fauna tunnels under the road will not suffice as an ecological bridge and either large scale over passes (wildlife movement systems) such as those used by the Brisbane City Council in the Compton Road project. Even better – pay the money and tunnel straight through to the intersection of Warringah Road and Wakehurst Parkway and reduce the speed on the existing stretch of 2 lane Wakehurst Parkway between dawn and dusk.


Burnt Bridge Creek

I object to the destruction of the Burnt Bridge Creek.
The value of green sites, remnant bushland, trees and the green lungs of our city is only increasing. The proposed damage to the Burnt Bridge Creek will be irreparable and impact not only the local people and bike commuters that use and love the area but also the flora and fauna which depend on this wildlife corridor and reliable source of water to survive. Projected waste water flows are unacceptable as is the water draw downs that will see the creek effectively dry up with baseflow reduction of 69-96% modelled. This effectively leaves the creek as a stormwater drain that only has water in it after large rainfall events.

On a personal note, this creek and its walking bike path may not seem like much but people can walk through the beautiful, vegetated area in shade during summer. Our summers are getting hotter too so having these cool shaded areas to walk through, take our dogs, teach our kids to ride a bike or scooter, show them native animals such as Eastern Water Dragons, Flying Foxes, possum dreys, eels and ducks along the way is such as special thing for a community to have access to.




Middle Harbour and Clontarf

I object to the dangerous plumes of contaminated sediments that have been modelled to impact Middle harbour, Spit West and Clontarf areas of the harbour. This is unacceptable, as is the lack of detail about how these sediments will be dealt with. People use these waters (in and on them via sailing, paddling, swimming, dog swimming) and fish from these waters. Flora and fauna live in or visit these waters – even a whale visited a few years ago.



Construction Noise and Traffic Impacts

I object to the 6 year plus construction noise and local traffic impacts that the tunnel construction is going to have in particular on the people of North Balgowlah who are effectively surrounded by the project on both sides.



There are many other areas I also object to as well, for example, unfiltered emissions stacks and no dedicated bus lanes proposed for the tunnel. With the printed EIS documents weighing in at some 22kg of documentation I have not had the time or access to the expertise to fully understand the implications of the project in all the various impact areas.

Please do not go ahead with this project - particularly in it’s current design and plan. We have too much to lose and we need to protect the environment and think more strategically than just building a bigger, very expensive and destructive pipe to handle more traffic.

Yours sincerely

As a sufferer of bronchial problems, and the owner of a property within 350 metres, above a stack, I am concerned with the increased unfiltered concentrated emissions that will affect me, my family and the local community and the long term carcinogenic issues that are unstudied.
As the mother of 3 young children, I am concerned for their safety on the roads in our suburb, including outside our own house, that will see increased traffic during the 7 years construction and as future rat runs as people try to avoid the cost of the tunnel that they will not pay on a daily basis.
I am also concerned about the increased development that will follow in order to justify spending $16 billion +, on a tunnel to a finite peninsular, rather than look at alternative transport solutions. This will result in further destruction of the fragile environment that can’t be replaced.
As a psychologist, I am concerned with the effect that ongoing construction for a prolonged period of time will have on myself, my family and my community through increased stress levels, due to noise, vibration, dust and particles, and inability for traffic to move freely in and out of my community with the excessive 24hr construction schedule.
While transport solutions do need to be found, limiting our options and forcing people who may suffer from phobias, into one of the longest tunnels in the world (& therefore long term effects again untested) is not a great solution. It is a disaster waiting to happen. Let alone the situation it is creating in placing more traffic into a confined space should problems arise.
In a period now, post a pandemic, I am interested to know where this traffic is going. If you look at other major cities of the world, solutions to decrease traffic and concentrate people in a central city are what are required and being looked into. Why are we disturbing and destroying the natural beauty and environment to increase this? Once it is gone, there is no getting it back and as the mother of 3 young children, born on the Northern Beaches but citizens of the world, I find this tragic.

I am a parent within the community of North Balgowlah and am very concerned about the proposed changes to our community and surrounds. We moved to this area for the local school, safety and access to green space. We do not want 7 years of construction and increased traffic and noise for an outcome of more cars and no public transport option. The green environment, the animals, habitats and flora and fauna that will be destroyed and the the destruction of manly dam, let alone the impacts it will have on our children with the exhaust fumes and chances of risk with increase traffic on our quiet community 40km streets.
Please consider the local families, the environment and whether this tunnel is really producing the best possible outcome for this area? We appreciate you reviewing our request. Monique

The Beaches Link Tunnel is proposed to solve a long term problem that will not exist because of changes to the work/life balance following the broader adoption of Work-from Home (WFH) and investment in WFH Hubs in the northern beaches.
Fewer people will need or want to drive to the city (and beyond) during the morning peak. Many will drive to the office on the days they are required during non-peak times.
As a consequence, there will be a big reduction in the peak morning traffic flow.
• Having more residents in the northern beaches working from home, presents opportunities
to increase local public transport options and active transport possibilities like walking and
bike riding.
• Despite the overall reduction of commuter traffic, induced demand and funnelling effects
will result in more congestion and longer delays on local roads around the tunnel entrances,
eliminating travel time savings in the tunnel.
• The Beaches Link Tunnel will have a disastrous impact on the lifestyle of residents and
during the construction phase and cause long term irreparable damage to our precious
environment and green spaces.
There are better options available, I'm for progress but not at the detriment to our health, our living conditions, sanity and more importantly to the beautiful environment I use every day. Manly Dam must be protected at all costs, the current proposal does not have enough controls and protections to ensure the safety of our waterways and wildlife. Please look to cities like Stockholm, Singapore and see how they have prioritised public transport, pedestrians and cycle lanes.
The Northern Beaches Hospital underpass is a case in point, such optimism for cutting traffic congestion, yet I'm experiencing the traffic queues and delays similar to the disruption caused by the construction period. Please rethink this plan.

Further to my previous submission,
I would like to specifically call out my objection to any dredging done in and around middle harbour as a result of the projects construction. My children and I regularly frequent Northbridge baths and the resulting contamination from the dredging – due to toxic sediment being stirred up and re-distributed – is projected to make the baths unusable for months if not years. This potential ramification – along with the general devastation to the green areas, waterways, and local flora and fauna, needs to be heavily taken into consideration as it devalues the suburb I live in and personally affects my property price.
Sincerely,
Michael Hearle

please refer attachment for the topics closest to me. there are other topics, just to mention a few:
- I cannot comprehend how the now "more normal than new" working from home arrangements have not been considered
- The expected toll charges seem extremely high and financially impacting many families - without sufficient alternatives through public transport
- if the tunnel is to support the increase of people living in the Northern Beaches - how is this supported by other infrastructure projects to cope with the addition of more vehicles
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE TRUE CONSULTATION OF THE COMMUNITY AND EFFORT TO EXPLORE ALTERNATIVES

I strongly object to this project for the following reasons.
Environmental impact - loss of trees, destruction of Burnt Bridge Creek and surounds - bushland, wildlife .
Traffic increasing not decreasing
Construction impact will impact North Balgowlah with dust, noise, vibration and heavy vehicle traffic in the area and the roads are not made for this additional traffic.
Ventilations stacks are a huge concern and we have so many schools, child care centres in this area and increased level of pollution is a huge worry considering residents already dealing with allergy/respiratory diseases.
Loss of recreational activities

As a local, I object to the development of additional transport infrastructure where the focus on private transport outweighs that of public. We want to discourage private vehicle transport in favour of good, environmentally friendly mass transit and this proposal goes against that.

The Hon Robert Stokes

Minister for Planning Industry and Environment

4 Parramatta Square, 12 Darcy Street,

PARRAMATTA NSW 2150

Attention: Ms Belinda Scott

28 February 2021

Objection to State Significant Infrastructure Application No. SSI-8862

Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

We refer to the above State Significant Infrastructure Application and are writing to object the project and urge you to do the same for the following reasons.

Failure to meet the requirements set out in the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs)

The State Government has an obligation to be a “model applicant” in submitting any State Significant Infrastructure application. This application does not meet the standard expected of a model applicant.

There are internal inconsistencies within the submitted documents and a failure to meet the requirements of the SEARS. For example, the EIS fails to demonstrate any adequate analysis of “how alternatives to and options within the project were analysed to inform the selection of the preferred alternative / option”, including public transport options. Furthermore, the EIS is littered with numerous mistakes and inaccuracies in the various technical reports.

Notification of the application is flawed and inadequate

The notification of the application was flawed and inadequate. To conduct “community engagement” on an infrastructure project of this size and scope under the cover of COViD-19 demonstrates utter contempt for both the process and the residents, students, businesses and workers affected by the proposal.

The notification period provides too little time for the community to digest and respond to voluminous and technical documents (more than 9,000 pages of EIS). This is the first opportunity that the community has had to understand the specific route, location of stacks and detail of this project.

It is clear that many people significantly impacted by this project are unaware that the consultation was underway and concludes on 1 March 2021.

We, therefore, urge you to significantly extend the notification and community consultation of this application until the COVID-19 pandemic arrangements have been lifted so that you may complete a rigorous and inclusive community consultation.

No travel time benefits – questionable evidence provided

The stated “benefits” are unsupported and have no basis in fact. I object to the project on these grounds.

For example, the EIS claims that there will be a time saving of 56 minutes from Dee Why to Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport. However, Google Maps currently cites the trip as between 47 minutes and 1 hour 15 minutes. To suggest that it would be possible to travel from Dee Why to the Airport (30km) in 19 minutes is absurd.

There are many other such examples throughout the EIS.

Devastating environmental and social impacts of the application on the whole of the North Sydney Local Government Area and I object to the project on these grounds.

Loss of public open (green) space

There is an existing lack of adequate public open space in the North Sydney local government area. The proposal will have a devastating impact on existing public open space (particularly green space) in North Sydney. There will be a permanent loss of 28,896m2 of land in Cammeray Park and the removal of Council’s stormwater harvesting facility.

There is absolutely no need for the proposed WHT/Beaches Link/Gore Hill Freeway Connection Motorway Facilities Buildings to be located on the surface. The proposed location of these facilities will have significant adverse visual impacts and will result in the permanent loss of precious, highly valued public green space.

The proposal will have devastating impacts on public open space, particularly vital urban bushland, in Flat Rock Creek, Middle Harbour, Seaforth and Balgowlah.

The significant permanent loss of public open (green) space in the North Sydney local government area and throughout the tunnel corridor warrants refusal of this application.

Air quality

Existing air quality in the North Sydney Local Government Area is poor – the community health impacts due to the proximity of a highly dense and sensitive population to the existing Warringah Expressway will be adversely and significantly exacerbated if the project proceeds. I object to it proceeding based on the impact on air quality to the local area.

The location of unfiltered ventilation stacks close to pre-schools, primary and secondary schools and hospitals cannot be supported and are grounds for refusal.

My two children aged 5 and 7 will suffer the impacts for years to come. There is not substantial long term modelling on the impact on children. The government does not have the research and what they have is based on short tunnels that are less than 20 years old. Cammeray has over 14kms of tunnels being blown through two stacks. This should not be allowed and they should either be filtered or moved away from such a high population of children.

Traffic impacts

The project fails to provide a sustainable response to metropolitan congestion. The provision of such a tunnel is counter to all reasonable and sustainable transport and traffic planning evidence and principles. The project will result in significant adverse impacts including, but not limited to, significant net additional traffic on Berry Street, Miller Street, Falcon Street and Pacific Highway (south of Falcon Street) as well as significant reductions in levels of service.

The occupation of construction site BL1 (the Cammeray Golf Course construction site) will be extended by 2 years to 7 years in total as a direct result of this project. This will cause significant flow-on impacts on other arterial and local roads in the North Sydney local government area. It will cause rat running all over local Cammeray streets.

I object to the project which will cause rat running on local streets to avoid tolls and get to the entry/exit points. I ask that you reconsider closing off Ernest St, Miller St and Falcoln St to more than one harbour crossing.

Environmental impacts

The proposed submerged tunnel construction method across Middle Harbour requires significant dredging and sediment disturbance of the harbour floor.

The environmental impacts associated with dredging and cofferdam construction in the harbour are significant, unnecessary and will result in adverse and permanent impacts on water quality and marine biodiversity.

As the project facilitates private vehicle travel and will result in induced demand, there will be consequential environmental impacts from increased traffic movements along the tunnel corridor. I object to the project because of its devastating long term environmental impacts.

In short, the proposal will have devastating adverse impacts on the environment including, but not limited to:

· disturbance to the Middle Harbour floor and consequential impacts on maritime ecology and heritage;

· water quality in Middle Harbour and throughout the entire catchment along the tunnel corridor, marine biodiversity, foraging habitat as well as known roosting sites of threatened species;

· loss of Council’s stormwater harvesting and filtration facility in Cammeray Park;

· on-going impacts of “induced demand” as motorists take advantage of increased capacity and the congestion problems, over time, continue to be replicated on an increasing scale leading to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions and particulate matter.

Heritage

The proposal should be refused as a result of the unacceptable and significant impacts upon, numerous Heritage items of State and Local Significance including items of maritime and convict heritage. Further, the proposal will have a devastating impact on a number of items of Aboriginal heritage and numerous other remnant evidence of first inhabitants.

The EIS acknowledges these impacts on Aboriginal heritage and heritage items and proposes inadequate management strategies that cannot be relied upon to protect and preserve heritage along the tunnel corridor.

These alone are grounds for refusal of the application.

Visual bulk and scale

The proposal will result in unacceptable adverse impacts on visual amenity including the provision of large, ugly acoustic screens along the route and the impacts of the buildings to house the on-going operations of the tunnels.

Noise

When you combine the WHT and BL my children will be suffering noise and construction impacts for 10-12 years as will the thousands of children who reside in this area. This will have a genuine negative impact on their schooling and future. I object to the project because it is going to cause ongoing noise pollution.

Conclusion

This application will not deliver any amelioration to traffic congestion and will have devastating environmental, health and social impacts.

In summary, we urge you to refuse the application for the following reasons:

a) the lack of a business case for the project

b) lack of meaningful community consultation

c) the lack of alternative transport options including public transport

d) the lack of filtering in the proposed exhaust stacks

e) significant and devastating loss of public open space and future open space, loss of sporting facilities, loss of trees and canopy, loss of stormwater harvesting and water treatment infrastructure

f) significant adverse impacts on public health and wellbeing, particularly on schools, school children and residents

g) devastating environmental impacts on waterways, reserves, flora and fauna

h) inappropriate and untested mitigation measures

i) significant adverse impacts on aboriginal heritage and maritime environment

There are no tangible public benefits to be gained from this proposal.

For all of the reasons set out above this application should be refused.

Regards,
Samantha

I’m greatly concerned about Northbridge Sailing Club’s sailing area being greatly compromised. All our sailing courses will be affected by the maritime exclusion zones between Seaforth Bluff and Clive Park associated with the submerged tunnel works across Middle Harbour, and the temporary re-location of yacht moorings into a zone northwest of Seaforth Bluff.

NSC is a significant part of my life. I love sailing, and the works will mean sailing at NSC will become more difficult, less attractive, and even potentially completely infeasible. NSC is a jewel of a club, with an amazing history and a strong community ethos, helping people like myself to sail, a sport which is of particular importance in these Covid-19 affected times, being inherently a socially-distanced, outdoor pursuit that greatly assists with the collective mental health of the community (even in non-Covid times).

The impact on our club and community will be profound. With the sailing degraded we may lose members or be less able to attract new members, which affects the club’s viability. We depend on volunteers for our maintenance and improvements; if membership drops then there is simply less of a critical mass to regenerate the club following the Beaches Link construction.

We request TfNSW minimize the impact of maritime restrictions by urgently consulting in good faith with Northbridge Sailing Club, to help assist in retaining and regaining NSC’s attractiveness/viability.

I am concerned about the impact the beaches link will have on the burnt bridge creek. This creek is the life blood of manly and home to many local flora and fauna.

I am also concerned about the risk to air quality and noise pollution to the local public school Seaforth public.

As a resident of North Balgowlah, I object to the tunnel going ahead in its entirety, as I do not believe that the benefits outweigh the significant disadvantages. The impacts on the environment and the local populations are significant.

Pollution – as somebody who suffers from severe allergies and having a family with young children, I am seriously concerned about the two exhaust stacks at either side of our suburb. Our home lies directly in between the two stacks and will be impacted by emissions from both. The fact that these exhaust stacks are unfiltered is unacceptable and not global best practice. Furthermore there are major impacts from noise pollution and vibrations that will impact our neighbourhood.

Traffic and Road Safety – North Balgowlah (Woodbine St) is likely to become a rat run as cars try to avoid congested areas. This poses a risk to our children and their friends who walk to the local primary school. Furthermore, the short walk/cycle to Balgowlah Boys school will become treacherous for kids with the increase in traffic and disruption.

Impact on Balgowlah Boys Secondary College – the impact on this high performing school will be significant, whether from noise pollution, traffic impacts, air quality issues as well as the loss of open space. The ability to learn and to get safely to and from school are basic rights.

Impact on our local environment – as a family who love to get out on our bikes riding the Manly Dam trail, swimming in Manly Dam, cycling along Burnt Bridge Creek this development is likely to severely impact or stop all those activities. Furthermore the impact on our local wildlife is unacceptable – we love living here because this area is a haven for wildlife and is by its nature a more difficult area of Sydney to get to.

Please reconsider whether in this post Covid era, such a majorly disruptive project needs to proceed

The Hon Robert Stokes

Minister for Planning Industry and Environment

4 Parramatta Square, 12 Darcy Street,

PARRAMATTA NSW 2150

Attention: Ms Belinda Scott

28 February 2021

Objection to State Significant Infrastructure Application No. SSI-8862

Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

We refer to the above State Significant Infrastructure Application and are writing to object the project and urge you to do the same for the following reasons.

Failure to meet the requirements set out in the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs)

The State Government has an obligation to be a “model applicant” in submitting any State Significant Infrastructure application. This application does not meet the standard expected of a model applicant.

There are internal inconsistencies within the submitted documents and a failure to meet the requirements of the SEARS. For example, the EIS fails to demonstrate any adequate analysis of “how alternatives to and options within the project were analysed to inform the selection of the preferred alternative / option”, including public transport options. Furthermore, the EIS is littered with numerous mistakes and inaccuracies in the various technical reports.

Notification of the application is flawed and inadequate

The notification of the application was flawed and inadequate. To conduct “community engagement” on an infrastructure project of this size and scope under the cover of COViD-19 demonstrates utter contempt for both the process and the residents, students, businesses and workers affected by the proposal.

The notification period provides too little time for the community to digest and respond to voluminous and technical documents (more than 9,000 pages of EIS). This is the first opportunity that the community has had to understand the specific route, location of stacks and detail of this project.

It is clear that many people significantly impacted by this project are unaware that the consultation was underway and concludes on 1 March 2021.

We, therefore, urge you to significantly extend the notification and community consultation of this application until the COVID-19 pandemic arrangements have been lifted so that you may complete a rigorous and inclusive community consultation.

No travel time benefits – questionable evidence provided

The stated “benefits” are unsupported and have no basis in fact. I object to the project on these grounds.

For example, the EIS claims that there will be a time saving of 56 minutes from Dee Why to Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport. However, Google Maps currently cites the trip as between 47 minutes and 1 hour 15 minutes. To suggest that it would be possible to travel from Dee Why to the Airport (30km) in 19 minutes is absurd.

There are many other such examples throughout the EIS.

Devastating environmental and social impacts of the application on the whole of the North Sydney Local Government Area and I object to the project on these grounds.

Loss of public open (green) space

There is an existing lack of adequate public open space in the North Sydney local government area. The proposal will have a devastating impact on existing public open space (particularly green space) in North Sydney. There will be a permanent loss of 28,896m2 of land in Cammeray Park and the removal of Council’s stormwater harvesting facility.

There is absolutely no need for the proposed WHT/Beaches Link/Gore Hill Freeway Connection Motorway Facilities Buildings to be located on the surface. The proposed location of these facilities will have significant adverse visual impacts and will result in the permanent loss of precious, highly valued public green space.

The proposal will have devastating impacts on public open space, particularly vital urban bushland, in Flat Rock Creek, Middle Harbour, Seaforth and Balgowlah.

The significant permanent loss of public open (green) space in the North Sydney local government area and throughout the tunnel corridor warrants refusal of this application.

Air quality

Existing air quality in the North Sydney Local Government Area is poor – the community health impacts due to the proximity of a highly dense and sensitive population to the existing Warringah Expressway will be adversely and significantly exacerbated if the project proceeds. I object to it proceeding based on the impact on air quality to the local area.

The location of unfiltered ventilation stacks close to pre-schools, primary and secondary schools and hospitals cannot be supported and are grounds for refusal.

There is not substantial long term modelling on the impact on children. The government does not have the research and what they have is based on short tunnels that are less than 20 years old. Cammeray has over 14kms of tunnels being blown through two stacks. This should not be allowed and they should either be filtered or moved away from such a high population of children.

Traffic impacts

The project fails to provide a sustainable response to metropolitan congestion. The provision of such a tunnel is counter to all reasonable and sustainable transport and traffic planning evidence and principles. The project will result in significant adverse impacts including, but not limited to, significant net additional traffic on Berry Street, Miller Street, Falcon Street and Pacific Highway (south of Falcon Street) as well as significant reductions in levels of service.

The occupation of construction site BL1 (the Cammeray Golf Course construction site) will be extended by 2 years to 7 years in total as a direct result of this project. This will cause significant flow-on impacts on other arterial and local roads in the North Sydney local government area. It will cause rat running all over local Cammeray streets.

I object to the project which will cause rat running on local streets to avoid tolls and get to the entry/exit points. I ask that you reconsider closing off Ernest St, Miller St and Falcoln St to more than one harbour crossing.

Environmental impacts

The proposed submerged tunnel construction method across Middle Harbour requires significant dredging and sediment disturbance of the harbour floor.

The environmental impacts associated with dredging and cofferdam construction in the harbour are significant, unnecessary and will result in adverse and permanent impacts on water quality and marine biodiversity.

As the project facilitates private vehicle travel and will result in induced demand, there will be consequential environmental impacts from increased traffic movements along the tunnel corridor. I object to the project because of its devastating long term environmental impacts.

In short, the proposal will have devastating adverse impacts on the environment including, but not limited to:

· disturbance to the Middle Harbour floor and consequential impacts on maritime ecology and heritage;

· water quality in Middle Harbour and throughout the entire catchment along the tunnel corridor, marine biodiversity, foraging habitat as well as known roosting sites of threatened species;

· loss of Council’s stormwater harvesting and filtration facility in Cammeray Park;

· on-going impacts of “induced demand” as motorists take advantage of increased capacity and the congestion problems, over time, continue to be replicated on an increasing scale leading to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions and particulate matter.

Heritage

The proposal should be refused as a result of the unacceptable and significant impacts upon, numerous Heritage items of State and Local Significance including items of maritime and convict heritage. Further, the proposal will have a devastating impact on a number of items of Aboriginal heritage and numerous other remnant evidence of first inhabitants.

The EIS acknowledges these impacts on Aboriginal heritage and heritage items and proposes inadequate management strategies that cannot be relied upon to protect and preserve heritage along the tunnel corridor.

These alone are grounds for refusal of the application.

Visual bulk and scale

The proposal will result in unacceptable adverse impacts on visual amenity including the provision of large, ugly acoustic screens along the route and the impacts of the buildings to house the on-going operations of the tunnels.

Noise

When you combine the WHT and BL we will be suffering noise and construction impacts for 10-12 years as will the thousands of children who reside in this area. This will have a genuine negative impact on my schooling and future. I object to the project because it is going to cause ongoing noise pollution.

Conclusion

This application will not deliver any amelioration to traffic congestion and will have devastating environmental, health and social impacts.

In summary, we urge you to refuse the application for the following reasons:

a) the lack of a business case for the project

b) lack of meaningful community consultation

c) the lack of alternative transport options including public transport

d) the lack of filtering in the proposed exhaust stacks

e) significant and devastating loss of public open space and future open space, loss of sporting facilities, loss of trees and canopy, loss of stormwater harvesting and water treatment infrastructure

f) significant adverse impacts on public health and wellbeing, particularly on schools, school children and residents

g) devastating environmental impacts on waterways, reserves, flora and fauna

h) inappropriate and untested mitigation measures

i) significant adverse impacts on aboriginal heritage and maritime environment

There are no tangible public benefits to be gained from this proposal.

For all of the reasons set out above this application should be refused.

Regards,
Arlo

I oppose the approval and construction of the Northern Beaches Tunnel (NBT). I detail the reasons in the attached 1500 word submission. The case for constructing the NBT is based on flawed economic modelling and flawed traffic modelling (using pre-Covid and pre work-from-home traffic data) and ignoring a range of enhanced public transport options. If built the NBT will disrupt the amenity, endanger resident health and disrupt traffic in Balgowlah for 7 years during construction, and in perpetuity pollute the environment with runoff, dust and unfiltered tunnel emissions. The NBT should not be built.

I object to the proposed construction of the BLT as per the attached reasons

Dear Gladys, Rob & Zali,
We are unsure as to why you would agree to this proposal of a tunnel & unfiltered exhaust stacks so close to our homes & schools. Have you all actually read & watched the video & information contained in the Viable Transport Solutions document. Do you live somewhere close to a Tunnel exhaust stack? Do you have family or friends who do? and actually think that they are ok? Have you driven down the hill from Mona vale Rd or Beacon hill road or Sydney rd & actually looked at the horizon & seen the pollution that is in the air already? Do you really want to contribute more to that? Are you really, truly deep down ok with all the animals & trees that will be destroyed? Have you seen the congestion in the M5 due it being built as 2lanes & the advice that we should turn off our air conditioners & close our vents & windows...?? Or perhaps you drive through these congested tunnels and are ok with breathing in the toxic car fumes. How can we be warned to turn everything off but yet pump out that toxic air unfiltered??? Wouldn't it be better to spend more money on buses instead of trying to privatise everything. Wouldn't it be better to spend money on our very old & in great need of repair, public high schools & education? Why would you want to contribute more to polluting our children's air that the breathe by placing these so close to schools, our children, our future with unfiltered exhaust stacks? We see around the world forests & jungles being decimated for the pursuit of progress (money) & we worry for the world we worry for our children & families but yet we are doing that in our own back yard. I come from a family of asthmatics & I have lived on the northern beaches my whole life. I have seen many changes. The beauty about the northern beaches is not just the beaches but its amazing bushland & wild life all around this lucky area. I object to the current plan of unfiltered exhaust stacks so close to my home & our local schools. Many Thanks for reading this,

On behalf of 1st Northbridge Sea Scout Group, we object to the RMS Beaches Link project due to the unmitigated project effects to our Clive Park Boat Shed and titled lands, and to our normal maritime activities which includes over 95 years of waterway use (by our young Cubs, Scouts, Venturers, Leaders , Volunteers and Adult helpers, these include water wise training, swimming, canoeing and sailing activities).

We attach for DPIE review; a Cover letter including attachments: A - Background information; B - EIS Review and; C - Proposed conditions and Mitigations, to potentially reduce the risks and hazards introduced to the Middle Harbour maritime area, Flat Rock Gulley and Tunks Park. Our mitigations are planned to remove the significant risks and hazards from the Beaches Link project to the Aboriginal caves /shelters , remnant fish traps , artworks (i.e. rock art) , middens and artifacts which are located within the Commonwealth and State listed Clive Park Heritage Area.

I object to the Northern Beaches tunnel. I reside near the planned Balgowlah entrance. I expect it to impact my sleep with noise and vibration, cause low level stress amd health issues, increase my disease risk from increased traffic pollution and financially impact the value of my home.
I object to the treatment of residents in Dudley St and nearby who have had their homes acquired at rates that don’t allow them to purchase equivalent properties in this market.
I object to the increased pollution emissions where I live and my child goes to school. Living near a main road greatly increases health issues, and this will impact the health of local residents.
I am frustrated that there is no proposed filtering for the tunnel smoke stacks as the community wishes.
The tunnel build will cause 24 hour noise for years that will echo up the valley and the RMS is not accountable for noise and vibration causing sleep disturbance.
There is no incentive to reduce traffic pollution by encouraging electric cars or rail options.
The cost of the build is immense for the benefit of the city commuters that will save a few minutes for a few years. The traffic will still bottle neck at the bridge/tunnel entry.
The building of the tunnel will trigger rezoning of the areas near the portals and increased population density. This will quickly offset any improvements in commute.
I object to the environmental destruction of the tunnel to Burnt Bridge Creek and Manly Dam catchment. The creek flow is modelled to decrease 95% in the EIS. Locals love the trail by the creek to exercise for physical and mental health. The beauty and the flora and fauna will be destroyed.
Manly dam is a special ecological site and widening the wakehurst parkway will impact it with polluted run-off. The manly dam is enjoyed for recreation including swimming, hiking and mountain bike riding. The widening of the road will cut through the bike trails.
I object to possible destruction of aboriginal cultural sites.
I object to the removal of hundreds of mature trees.
I object to the health impact of 7 years of intrusive noise and vibration of construction on residents and students at Seaforth Public School and Balgowlah Boys High. This will impact Heath and learning.
I object to the impact of construction vechiles on local traffic.
I object to the dredging of the harbour which may release toxic sludge.
I object to the likely damage to local homes from the vibration.
This tunnel is not a long term solution. It’s expensive electioneering, not a long term solution.
I object to the wasteful use of taxpayers money.
The community consultation has been poor. We are still waiting for much information and do not feel that our concerns are addressed.