I give permission to publish the name "Edward Precinct"but not my name.
I did try to upload a docx version as well, in case useful to you, but for some reason your site rejected it.

I object to the project in its current format. While I support the development of the tunnel itself, consideration needs to be given to the proposed plan of development , While it is expected to interupt community activities while it is being built , this disruption should be minimised where possible.
As it currently stands the proposal will significantly prevent Northbridge sailing club from conducting its weekly competition. The club has served the community for the best part of a century and generations have passed through. It provides an excellent learn to sail program for local children such as mine who continue to serve the club in a voluntary capacity. The community spirit that this volunteer club encourages is important to continue to maintain. Such disruption could cause membership to fail and subsequently result in the decline of the club.
The club and it members and the local community would request further consultaion so that disruption to club activities can be minimised over such a long period.

I am writing to formally object to the Northern Beaches Tunnel plans and intent. My reasons for objecting are outlined in the attachment to this form.

1. Overall the tunnel to the Northern Beaches appears to involve enormous cost to the NSW taxpayer, disruption to NB residents for many years, permanent damage to the NB environment, and considerable uncertainty over what if any benefit will result. Recent changes arising from COVID including working from home and the near-universal substitution of Zoom (etc) for face-to-face meetings has changed traffic patterns and so increased the uncertainty of those benefits further. I appreciate that with record low interest rates and a need to stimulate the NSW economy infrastructure spending seems attractive, but the NB is the wrong place to do it. Instead invest in fast rail to the Central Coast and Newcastle - areas with enormous potential for growth of housing, office space (if needed) and a wide range of small and large businesses.

2. If the tunnel really MUST go ahead then the stacks must be filtered. The EIS cites uncertainties about the effect of traffic fumes, but the burden of proof should rest with the NSW Government - risking the health of local children is simply not acceptable. Unless there is convincing evidence that the stacks and fumes will NOT have a negative health impact on the local community then filters must be costed in and installed.

3. More work needs to be done on the environmental impact of the tunnel entrances. The plan (or need?) to pump away huge amounts of water to save the tunnels from flooding will leave Burnt Bridge Creek pretty much dry and have a currently unassessed impact on both the bushlands and domestic properties across a wide area of North Balgowlah. As the land dries out can we expect subsidence? Will there be a die-off of trees? What consideration has been given to alternative models, including pumping a proportion of the water to the top of the (Burnt Bridge) creek? After all, all of that water has to go somewhere - why not let some of it go down the creek?