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.

Cities all over the world are improving their public transport infrastructure, not building massive road tunnels for private cars. To combat conjested roads the government should be encouraging working from home and improving public transport. Please stop this backwards thinking and plan more carefully for Sydney's future.

Hi, my name is Bezi and I am 16 years old.
I started sailing at Northbridge Sailing Club in 2012 when I was 7 years old, and over time, this has impacted who I am today greatly. Being able to go down to the club everyday and go out on the beautiful middle harbour founded my love for sailing, which I now compete in at a State and National level, representing Northbridge Sailing Club.
I am also employed by the club, where I work as a sailing coach.
I also volunteer to teach the learn to sail program, spreading my love of sailing to all.
Not only this, but being at the club around the community there and being able to spread the love of sailing is something that impacts my mental health in such a positive way.
The Beaches Link tunnel will affect this greatly.
Now I know better than anyone how useful this tunnel will be, as I live in Castlecrag but attend school at Manly Selective - in North Curl Curl. This tunnel will affect me positively every day and hopefully change my 2 hour + commute every day JUST to go to school.
But I am also not stupid, and I know that the effects of the tunnel will be detrimental for Northbridge Sailing Club.
If you go sailing in middle harbour, chances are the wind will blow from an easterly direction (it's called a seabreeze) A typical sailing course involves an upwind and a downwind, and a wide harbour is needed to do so, because boats 'tack' across the harbour. The only feasible place to put this course is from the pontoon of the sailing club up about halfway up the harbour (east) towards Mosman. However, in your proposed plan there will the cofferdams and exclusion zones there?? So how will this be possible?? The harbour will also not look as pretty with barges and cofferdams, and this will drive away people from joining the sailing club and therefore I will eventually be put out of work for my job at the sailing club. Not only this, but without a learn to sail program, I will lose my meaningful connections with my friends at Northbridge Sailing Club, therefore possibly losing my love of sailing.
Please, please, please don't let this happen. I need Northbridge Sailing Club to stay alive.
I urge 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.
All I want to do is be able to keep sailing, and keep my job. Please make this possible. I beg you.

The proposal initially sounded positive to improve transport options to and from the area. However there are serious environmental issues that need to be resolved before the project is further approved. In principle, I object to:

1. the degradation of Balgowlah Golf Course and Burnt Bridge Creek - there will be a total loss of habitats for the entire construction period and possibly forever, in the case of the Creek and wildlife habitats and large trees which take decades to grow.
2. The size of an unfiltered exhaust tower - this proposal is reckless, exposing toxic fumes and residues to local residents that will affect their health and wellbeing, and will be an 8 storey high eye sore landmark.
3. The impact of 6 years (minimum) on local residents with construction chaos, noise, dust, extra traffic, heavy trucks moving in and through the local area. How unbearable for local residents! Further there is expected rat running of local residents trying to avoid construction and traffic delays. Local roads in these areas are already congested, dangerously so, at certain times of the day.
4. The amplification of Wakehurst Parkway will further degrade the environment in Garigal National Park and the Manly Dam area. It will also feed to areas that will not cope with traffic bottlenecks.
5. The goal of cutting traffic in Military Road will only improve traffic for an estimated 2 years.
6. Huge growth in visitor numbers are anticipated with the Tunnel's completion. Many of the northern beaches amenities will simply not cope with the influx, most notably being inadequate parking.

The Beaches Tunnel is therefore an inadequate solution to justify spending 10 billion dollars to cause immense local noise, dust, toxic outputs, traffic snarls, loss of local habitats and trees, as well as the loss of the enjoyment of the golf course, parks and amenities, and even local resident's homes. It threatens the health and wellbeing of those who live or work in the vicinity, exposing them to toxic fumes and hazards. It will be an eyesore, both during construction and thereafter. These issues need to be fully addressed before the Beaches Tunnel is further approved.

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage

Clive Park Aboriginal Site – Jacobs report states the sites could be subject to indirect impacts associated with vibration and settlement. Clive Park contains some significant sites which are important to protect.

Recommendation:
1. The large cave/ midden site and rock overhang 45-6-0654 need constant monitoring via engineering audits to ensure no rock fall on people who visit the cave and adjacent foreshore or who sit on the top of the overhang which is a popular park destination for its water views. If there is any sign of instability, people should be restricted from entering the area.

2. Funds should be set aside as part of the conditions of consent for maintenance and repair for any damage caused by the development as a precautionary measure as well as who is responsible for implementation. This should be determined in consultation with relevant stakeholders eg Aboriginal Heritage Office, NSW Gov authorities, local government and most importantly Aboriginal custodians.



Ecology

Recommendation:
All suitable felled trees with hollows, particularly those larger than 20cm should be relocated to nearby areas so they can continue to provide habitat for birds and arboreal mammals

If that is not feasible, then funds should be set aside for new artificial hollows to be made in suitable dead trees nearby or habitat boxes installed (which require long term maintenance that would need to be allocated for, along with who is responsible for long term maintenance)

Support permanent fauna connectivity measures and maintenance considerations for underpasses and rope crossings as per p. 244 of Appendix 5 Biodiversity Development Assessment Report by Arcadis. Must ensure in the conditions of consent that enough resources are allocated to implementation and ongoing maintenance and monitoring and who will be responsible. Consider that RMS may not undertake their responsibilities in the long term if they are not audited – so who will audit and implement in the short and long term?


Endangered Ecological Communities (TECs)

Recommendation:
Consider soil translocation of felled Duffeys Forest or other communities so long as Phytophthora is considered. If Phytophthora already exists at the possible host location, then translocation may be possible. Suitable host sites would need to be determined by Northern Beaches Council and NPWS


Water Quality Creeks

Recommendation: Consider as part of conditions of consent that funds are set aside to install permanent water quality improvement devices that capture rubbish and improve water quality with sediment and nutrient management. The suitable infrastructure should be determined in consultation with Sydney Water and the relevant local council as a kind of offset.

Water table draw down

Very concerned that moderate to high potential for ground water dependant ecosystems at Flat Rock Creek and Coastal Upland Swamp TEC have the potential to be impacted by water table draw down over the long term. Also very concerned that this EIS will be assessed with the acknowledgement that impacts are not known (p. 238 and 244 Appendix 5 Biodiversity Development Assessment Report by Arcadis).

Recommendation:
The potential areas impacted by drawdown need to be mapped and appropriate offsets included based on worst case scenario as a precautionary principle in the conditions of consent, particularly in relation to riparian areas and TECs. Figure 7-1 map b and e should identify potential indirect impact areas from drawdown requiring biodiversity offsets.

Recommendation:
The conditions of consent also need to ensure monitoring in the long term – for a minimum of 50 years along with appropriate funds to undertake that work and allocation of responsibilities. If you leave it with RMS, they will forget and no one will audit them to ensure it is being done. Best to give the funds to local government as an independent auditor.

Recommendation:
Support tunnel linings to minimise water table drawdown and any other best practice measures.


Replacement Trees / Bush regeneration

Recommendation: Ensure the conditions of consent allocate for replacement trees dying within a 5 year period and the need for an audit and replanting. Local government needs to be allocated enough funds to ensure maintenance and management of replacement vegetation on land under their responsibility for a minimum of 10 years and for drawdown impacts for a minimum of 50 years.

Having lived in this area for over half a century, I have watched in dismay the gradual destruction of the environment in the name of "progress". Hopes have constantly been dashed when measures to protect our sensitive environment are ignored for perceived financial gain. Already compromised by the housing proliferation, Burnt Bridge Creek is a shadow of its former self. Water holes have been obliterated , confined to concrete pipes under roads, habitat of the natural fauna & flora destroyed . The little that remains of this once pristine waterway is ecologically & hydrologically important as pointed out in the environmental impact studies already carried out. We have the ability to protect it for future generations before it is lost forever. This is the last chance to preserve this natural asset and I urge you to have a long term approach to finding a solution that doesn't result in its destruction.

hi-I am a 13 yr old boy. I have grown up in this area all my life. I live not far from Burnt Bridge Creek. I love the Creek, all the trees and animals there. I have just found out if you build the tunnel, the Burnt Bridge Creek will loose 96% of its water, that means the creek will die, that means the trees will die, that means the animals will die. I don't want that to happen. I love all the nature around me. I also found out that you want to build huge ventilation stacks -so that polluted air can spread around 1200 mts. Do you realize that not only me, but lots of kids will breathe this polluted air and lots of kids are asthmatic-like me. This will make even healthy kids sick, but for us asthmatics, make us even sicker. We would go to hospital more often and some of us could die. Please dont build this tunnel-we dont even need it. We just need a good bus system, better than what we have. PLEASE DONT BUILD THE TUNNEL

Section 3.1 of the EIS states:
The population of
"Greater Sydney is forecast to grow from five million to eight million people over the next 40 years" this statement is not referenced but appears to be from "Directions for a Greater Sydney 2017-2056 (Greater Sydney Commission, 2017)" This population growth forecast is outdated as it is prior to the effects of Covid-19 and should be revisited. In addition the growth targets are as a result of political decisions that have seen Australia's immigration rate rise from modest levels in the early 2000's to be the highest in the OECD.

The above factors highlight the risk in adopting population growth forecasts that are both politically motivated and pre-covid. I suggest factoring should be applied to the modelling so that a lower population growth rate is assumed.

Section 4.3.5 is well written and in particular, builds a solid case for not planning a rail line to the Northern Beaches.

I object to the above proposed project development for all of the following reasons:
1 There is no public business case which substantiates the necessity of this project.
2 Alternatives to satisfy the same objectives have not been adequately explored by the state government.
3 A substantive alternatives analysis has not been completed under SEARS as required.
4 The risk assessment is incomplete.
5 There is no justification of the travel savings described.
6 The benefits are based on future population growth, and furthermore traffic modelling is based on old numbers (2012 and 2016) with no consideration of the effects of the pandemic on traffic patterns.
7 The cost of the project is prohibitive.
8 The negative impact on Middle Harbour and the nearby harbour beaches with the dredging of contaminated soil and removal of same by barge. The PFAS and heavy metals detected in the sludge pose a health risk for residents and users of the waterways.
9 The significant impact on Flat Rock Gully as follows:
a. Contaminated soil being dug up;
b. Negative impact on biodiversity, critical habitat and existing wildlife corridors; and
c. 390 trees destroyed. All of these items require further consideration.
10 Loss of green space in Cammeray, specifically around the Cammeray Golf Course and Flat Rock Gully.
11 The proposed Beaches Link does not resolve any local traffic congestion in Cammeray, North Sydney and other suburbs on the lower north shore. If anything, the project creates a number of failed intersections.
12 The construction and ventilation stacks would create health issues and risks as follows:
a. Airborne contaminants
b. Emissions from the ventilation stacks
c. Dust
d. Significant vehicle emission during construction
e. Removal and transport of contaminated soils
In summary, I object to the project as the benefits have not been clearly demonstrated and the alternatives have not been adequately explored. In addition, the significant impact on the environment and the risks created by construction and the infrastructure itself have not been adequately dealt with in the proposal.

I strongly object to the Beaches Link Tunnel and Gore Hill Freeway Update Project. Details in attached pdf document.