I live in Fromelles Ave, Seaforth. I strongly oppose the proposed Beaches Link Tunnel for many reasons.

(1) Two unfiltered smoke stacks which will be within close range of Balgowlah and Seaforth.
(2) Damage to the environment including the loss of local flora and fauna.
(3) The stress that a 6+ year build will have on people who live in the local area.
(4) As we saw with the West Connex the potential damage to houses where the tunnel runs directly beneath close to the surface. Some of these houses were 40m above the tunnel and developed major structural damage.
(5) The fact that a select few from Northern Beaches would actually use it.
(6) Despite the projected time savings along Military road, in my opinion traffic will stay the same as people will refuse to pay the excessive tolls.
(7) The bottle neck that will be created at Manly Vale at the Tunnel entrance and exit.
(8) The EIS acknowledges there will be increased congestion on Wakehurst parkway.
(9) No public transport solutions.

It is my belief that a better transport system is what the people of the Northern Beaches want not more cars and traffic. If this tunnel is approved I am sure that numerous housing developments will be slated to increase population density all over the Northern Beaches changing its character forever.

Please leave the Northern Beaches as it is. The last thing we want is more overdevelopment resulting in concrete structure after concrete structure whilst destroying the environment.

Finally, will the tunnel cure the choking local traffic through areas such as Manly Vale, Brookvale, Dee Why, Narrabeen, Warriewood, Mona Vale etc. particularly on weekends? No. The tunnel will make it worse.

Please don’t quote more statistics in response.

Cheers
Werner Hoffmann.

I object to the project for a number of reasons
1. the EIS is not current and much of it was written before Covid. Therefore the facts and data it contains are irrelevant to current situation eg with respect to travel time data, post covid - there is much less dependency on peak hour travel. many more people are working from home and will continue to do so as workplaces have become more flexible. thus a new, up to date post-covid EIS needs to be written and re submitted for community consultation.
2. the 'beaches tunnel' has been declared "worlds best practice', however, this is untrue, as 'world's best practice' would include filtration of the tunnel ventilation/emission stacks. as plainly stated in the eis, these will NOT be filtered, therefore this plan for beaches tunnel is NOT worlds best practice, therefore, until it can be deemed, "worlds best practice', it should NOT go ahead. Additionally, at least one of the ventilation stacks, in Cammeray, is next to a school, potentially harming our children's lungs for a generation.
3. the name 'beaches link' is a misnomer as the tunnel goes to Balgowlah. not to the beach. thus, this is false marketing and false representation of a state significant project and as such should be addressed with a name more representative of what it actually is.
4. the original document signed by Mike Baird when he was premier clearly stated that in finding a solution to traffic congestion along military rd and this corridor that public transport options NOT be considered. This is a blatant abuse of the investigative process and thus excluded from the start, any real objective research into the best solution for the traffic congestion problems identified. thus, the basis of the project is biased and non-scientific and illogical from the start. therefore, the project needs to stop until a full investigation into public transport options, especially rail from dee why-chatswood can be evaluated and compared to the proposed $15,000,000,000 stretch of road /tunnel that is the .beaches link. also, there has been some mention that Mike Baird was prompted to exclude public transport option from this project plan because large transport companies like Transurban were major political party donors and also may have struck a deal to provide Mike Baird with a post political job within the transport industry, therefore, the project begun with a false and seemingly biased , even corrupt selection process that excluded any consideration of public transport - especially trains in its analysis of best solution to traffic congestion.
5. at $15,000,000,000 this project is unjustifiably expensive for the 16 km stretch of road/ tunnel that is outlines and thus must be analysed further wrt to cost-benefit. however, since the travel data contained within the EIS is out of date by up to 5 years, this is not possible, and thus such expenditure can not be justified.
6. this project is unethical as it uses public money to make a private Toll road and as such is not for the benefit of the wider community. The tolls will be too expensive for most and this will encourage rat-racing and more traffic on local roads. thus the road/tunnel will never achieve its aim of reducing traffic.
7. due to the phenomenon of 'traffic demand' , whereby in the absence of viable public transport options, such a project will only increase car travel and thus any short term reduction in traffic congestion along military rd and similarly congested roads will soon be reversed. thus, this project is ill conceived, short sighted, un ethical and nonsensical.
8. this project actually encourages car travel and further tolling in sydney. major cities around the world have all shown the negative effects of car congestion in their cbds yet this project aims to increase car travel into sydney's cbd. this is irresponsible planning and not in sydney's long term interests.
9. the non-filtered emission stacks will spew forth the products from the 15 km tunnel over the suburbs of cammeray and nearly north sydney where there is a high concentration of preschool, primary and secondary schools. this is unacceptable since the increased car and diesel truck exhaust fumes contain several extremely toxic substances including tiny particles that are hazardous for human respiratory and circulatory health. this effect is heightened in the bodies of young children, thus it is unacceptable that the tunnel emission stacks be not-filtered and located in such close proximity to schools.
10. the primary dig site at flat rock gully is unsuitable as it will entail digging through layers of decades old dump site contaminated substances. the land will contain asbestos, toxic gases and other unknown items that were legally allowed to be dumped there last century. digging at this site will also release noxious fumes and contribute to unacceptable levels of air, noise and traffic pollution. the numbers of truck movement along flat rock drive is dangerous for other drivers on the road. flat rock gully is home to several protected and endangered species including small bird populations, rock wallaby, powerful owl, lizards and many more creature catalogued by willoughby wildlife group WEPA.
plus the risk of contaminating nearby and downstream flat rock gully native wildlife corridor is unacceptable, plus further downstream contamination risk of Tunks park waters is unacceptable.
11. the proposed coffer dam to go in water off northbridge is unacceptable, as is the dredging in that area to make way for the semi-submerged tunnel. the dredging will alter silt tidal patterns and damage the seagrasses and delicate marine ecosystems located in these waters. the waters have only recently returned to a high state of cleanliness as evidenced by recent sightings of seals and even a whale a few years back. dredging these water will disturb decades old layers of harbour sludge containing toxic sediments. the toxic fallout from digging in these waterways will result in closing down valuable public amenities such as northbridge baths, and northbridge sailing club. any risk of contamination to these waterways is unacceptable and thus the tunnel must not proceed through this route.
12. the government has recently declared am 'open space' initiative/policy in which it seeks to protect precious open green spaces. this project is not in alignment with this policy as this project will result in bulldozing at flat rock gully to make way for dig site and truck turning circle, plus destruction of various golf courses eg cammeray and balgowlah.
13. the advertising material and marketing brochures for this tunnel clearly depict a bus travelling through it. however, i was told by an engineer at a northbridge information session at our local golf club that the tunnel would be too steep to allow buses to travel in it. therefore, the promotional material for the tunnel has been misleading and as such, has not been providing accurate information for community consultation. this is highly inappropriate for a state significant project, its false and misleading information and as such, the project should be halted until such time that the EIS traffic data is current, covid-relevant and accurate with respect to whether or not buses will be able to travel in it.
14. the plans for the tunnel are less than 50 % complete at this time, therefore the EIS can not provide a comprehensive impact study, therefore the EIS must be re-done and submitted for further consultation.
15. the prime objective of population growth via immigration must now be re-assessed , given that we are now living with the ongoing threat of covid. therefore, the projected need for the tunnel is lessened and thus the business case weakened in current covid - times. the EIS makes no mention of current work travel time changes due to covid and is thus out-of-date and irrelevant on many counts.
in conclusion i object to this 'beaches Tunnel' project going ahead on several counts. namely the EIS is out of date, the business case doesn't hold up, the primary objective for the tunnel is biased away from public transport options and the project is too expensive and environmentally damaging for sydney's precious natural habitat and waterways.
16. the volume of trucks in Cammeray, causing pollution, noise pollution and increased traffic is estmated at almost 1000 a day for 8 years - this is unacceptable
I recommend a complete review of the original process in which ALL options are considered and compared to find the best way to approach perceived traffic congestion. I suggest that train options be reviewed and considered as a priority. I recommend an investigation into the original conception of the idea from Mike Baird's time as premier and any undue bias towards road/tunnel projects over more viable public transport options, particularly rail. i strongly oppose Flat rock Gully as main dig site as it has undergone amazing regeneration the past few decades to the extent that is now a native wildlife corridor of major significance and as such should be protected - and ruyns the risk of significant toxic pollution as it used to be a tip.
I strongly oppose the high cost of this project , especially when the net outcome of relatively small reductions in travel times data is evident. i recommend that similar traffic travel data outcomes could be achieved by improving current roads and public transport scheduling eg buses and trains, at a fraction of the $15 billion cost. also, if the prime objective is to on sell this road/tunnel to a large transport toll company like Transurban - then the basis for this project is unjust as Transurban holds a monopoly over tolled roads in sydney and thus there is no assurance of best value spending of public money - this is negligent and irresponsible. This project does not have the best interests of the general public in mind. this project os narrow minded and its focus too short term to have any lasting positive impact.

I object to the Beaches link on economic, health and environmental reasons.
I do not believe that the stated marginal congestion benefits of the tunnel, especially on Military Rd, warrant the stated cost (and cost blowouts on recent projects indicate that this is a “best case“ costing). Inevitable increased urban densities on the Northern Beaches will result in any improvement in traffic congestion to be short lived. The solution is to improve public transport rather than to encourage private transport.
Tunnels of similar length overseas usually have filtered emissions stacks. Three public schools (Seaforth, Balgowlah boys and ANZAC) will experience health impacts from emissions. It is not acceptable for the emissions to be unfiltered. If it is uneconomic to filter the emissions, then the tunnel is uneconomic.
There will be significant terrestrial environmental impacts in the vicinity of both the Wakehurst Parkway and Burnt Bridge Deviation access points as well as marine environmental impacts from the tunnel disturbing toxic sediments.

In addition to these objections, I believe the many impacts of construction (6 years “best case”) on people who live in the vicinity of the work to be unacceptable. These include noise, vibration, traffic disruption and congestion.
More work needs to be done to find a better solution to transport difficulties on the Northern Beaches, including thinking more creatively about public transport options.

Thank you for this opportunity to provide feedback on the EIS for this project.
I object to both the EIS, and the actual Beaches Link proposal.
We have resided in Manly Vale for 30 years and have no plans to move. We have raised our family here and cannot conceive of a better region in which to live. We drive on the local roads, our children attend the local schools and we spend our recreational time in the great outdoors that surrounds us. We are particularly grateful for the foresight of people who acted to reserve and preserve the high-value bush and waterways – and we honour their legacy.
This is our home, and we value the amenity and community on offer – and to which we have tried to “give back”. In addition to the social aspects, we also highly value the local bushland and waterways and we have tried to contribute personally to its maintenance and improvement. We value our natural environment not simply because it is a place of recreation and renewal, but because we believe it has intrinsic value independent of short-sighted human demands. Even from an entirely utilitarian perspective, maintaining the health of the environment is essential to guarantee the best quality of life for present and future generations.
I object to the EIS, and the current tunnel plan it is meant to support because the evidence simply does not indicate a net benefit – far from it.
We acknowledge that there is need for solutions to the many transport problems across the Northern Beaches, but we do not see the current Beaches Link proposal as being the solution. Policies and infrastructure that are innovative and paradigm-shifting are needed - not an expensive, unimaginative, 20th century solution to a 21st century problem.
Please find attached my detailed objections and recommendations.

See attached submission

To whom it may concern, I strongly object to the Beaches Link Tunnel going ahead. I have grave concerns for the health and environmental impact to the residents, natural green spaces and waterways. Proceeding with a tunnel with unfiltered stacks that spew pollution over communities is irresponsible, unnecessary and dangerous.
The increase in road pollution over the span of the 8year project will impact local communities greatly as will the inconvenience of road closures and delays.
The use of toll roads is an archaic practice and not that of a future thinking government.
I propose an updated EIS be made available with relevant and transparent accounting and a business case be presented to justify this project to the residents of NSW.
When the world is looking for sustainable practices to nurture our planet for future generations the proposed Northern Beaches Tunnel seems so out of touch with current times.

I STRONGLY OBJECT that our children and grandchildren will be subjected to exhaust fumes and microscopic particulate from UNFILTERED emission stacks in Cammeray Golf Course and St Leonards Park which will put their health, along with that of the elderly, at risk for many years.
North Sydney LGA has the highest number of schools and childcare centres of anywhere in Australia!
This will only be exacerbated by the Federal Government's refusal to adopt the highest international standards of vehicle emissions and fuel cleanliness (eg, Euro 6 and 7), which means that vehicles in Australia are 'dirtier' than most others.
I STRONGLY OBJECT to the taking of green space in Cammeray Golf Course and St Leonards Park as well as from the south-east corner of Anzac Park where we have a Community Vegetable Garden.

I demand that an equal area of green space be created locally for all public open space taken by the project.
I object to being subjected to years and years of traffic chaos, noise, dust and vibration from hundreds of trucks thundering through the lower North Shore which will have serious health impacts on local residents and incur serious risk of damage to houses and buildings.
Noise levels throughout the day on the Warringah Freeway will be incredibly loud and continuous for five or six years or more. How are we supposed to live our lives with that level, pitch and duration of noise?