Integrity of local natural ecosystems:
The design of this tunnel to exit out halfway along Wakehurst Parkway is disingenuous and will irreversibly tip the balance of the surrounding nature reserve towards permanent degradation. This is due to the following:
*Heavy construction site with associated sediment run on throughout the build period will impact water quality of the dam exacerbating toxic algal blooms and pushing rare and endangered fish towards extinction (See attached 'Presentation 1' for the image of the waterfall which is a tributary to Manly Dam that this proposed construction site will be directing polluted, sediment laden water towards)
*Project will irreparably server the wildlife corridor over the the fresh water at Manly Dam - adding to the insult of the Northern Beaches Hospital which severed the corridor from the North
*Light pollution from vehicles will impact the wildlife that do remain in the area as a widened, more heavily used road is established through the bushland
At this point in history, as the incalculable value of natural assets is finally starting to be recognised we must consider the environmental footprint of all large projects carefully or we risk passing the tipping point where our local ecosystems collapse and we see the end of the owls, other wild and majestic birds, wallabies, monitor lizards, water dragons, pygmy possums etc.
We have a chance, with this project, to keep the tunnel UNDERGROUND until it connects to the large intersection in Frenchs Forest where suitable infrastructure to receive and distribute the tunnel traffic is now in place. The cost to keep the tunnel through until this point is offset by the long term value to our community of retaining Wakehurst Parkway as a local road with less traffic, offering an ability to enhance the biodiversity and natural value of this important part of our community.

Air pollution
Air MUST BE FILTERED as it is vented from the tunnel. Wind travels from the west most days and this proposed site of exit with unfiltered stacks will directly and irrevocably impact the residents of Manly Vale and the students at MVPS. It is unconscionable that we would build such a tunnel and not take the opportunity to filter the exhaust.

Construction adjacent to Bally Boys
Consider the site of this and how it can be as far removed from the school as possible - many of these students endured years and years of noisy and dustry construction while at MVPS, and now they are poised to be subject to this. It is disruptive and impacts concentration. The dust is bad for their health and the construction traffic is a liability. We need the entrance and exits for site traffic to be well away from the school and also timed NOT TO COINCIDE with school drop off or end of the school day.

Finally please also ensure the bat colony in Balgowlah is ENTIRELY protected throughout as they are a keystone species essential to the balance of our local ecosystem and must be protected. They have already suffered much in the way of habitat destruction. Please also ensure no run-off into the creek along Burnt Bridge Creek deviation.

Thank you, Julia

I strongly object to the Beaches Link Tunnel because:-
The pollution from the stacks will not be filtered and will pollute the area and schools.
The number of truck movements per day are staggering. There will be morning and afternoon peak hour chaos and For years. The government will not be forgiven for putting all the people north of the Harbour Bridge through such torture and for no proven benefit. The developers are already no doubt getting ready to move in to the Northern Beaches areas.
I am also very concerned about the toxic sludge which will be disturbed in the harbour. Are we going to see brown water instead of blue?
A train link between Dee Why and Chatswood - via the hospital- is a must.

We object to the Beaches Link proposal with the many paged to say very little EIS illuminating some simple facts to show that progressing an exorbitantly expensive privately held asset like a toll way will only, ultimately bring more frustration and harm to the communities it is meant to help.

At an estimated $14 billion (circa 2018) build cost, reliant upon five-year old traffic data, still based upon pre-Covid work patterns, peak hours and slated to begin in two years (neatly coinciding with the next NSW state election due in March 2023) and taking at best five years so, maybe a 2028 completion date the plan to forever tax / toll the community to address the ‘Military Road’ problem simply falls short on many grounds. It is not unreasonable, easy to argue just some of the following:
- Health and environmental risks for example, destruction of seabeds, bushland and green open spaces have not been properly nor adequately assessed, any discussion of same in the EIS lacks proper scope and community consultation failing to meet expectations.
- Public, mass transit alternatives have not been considered; (the original document signed off by Mike Baird states solutions to traffic congestion along the Military Road corridor not include public transport inputs, alternatives. Why?
- The toll / tax trade off to transitory ‘time savings’ is more local road congestion. Getting to and from the proposed entry / exit points in Balgowlah and Seaforth will negate, erode any transitory ‘tunnel time’ saved. One lane local roads will only clog further; the Link finishes up short in every aspect.
- Unsurprisingly Infrastructure NSW rates the Beaches Link as a low priority project.
- A fully worked, open to proper analysis Cost Benefit analysis is not available? The Inquiry into Westconnex found that business cases for future projects should be released prior to planning approval. An expected norm of good government, like stakeholders in the commercial world the community demand transparency from those elected to serve the interests of all the people.
- NSW Department of Planning 10 year population projections show the Northern Beaches local government areas might be expected grow by about 150 thousand people whilst the Western LGAs grow by about a million people over the same period. How does this proposal relate to the taxpayer?
- The proposal transverses a high proportion of the local community’s schools, pre-schools and childcare facilities. Is it safe, practical?

Some other glaring examples of a singularly biased planning and consultation process that my family objects to:
- Filtration of the pollution stacks is not considered, world best practice is absent here and all over the proposal.
- Traffic is projected to be insufficient to ‘fill’ the toll way ‘payoff’ requirements, exacerbated by yet not factored for changed Covid work practices. Any ‘need to feed’ traffic into Westconnex and encourage rat runs is not a community serving reason to spend upwards of $20 billion (by built time) of taxpayer funds all to tax many taxpayers over and over again.
- In a growing metropolis the Beaches community have waited patiently for a mass transit solution for decades. As frequent business and holiday travellers with the B-Line and the Airport train we get the benefits of well thought through public transit options. How will Beaches people access Sydney’s second 24-hour airport, our children universities, work opportunities, etc.?

To say the proposal has got this far without the community getting full transparency is disappointing. That the voluminous EIS lacks detail on issues of high community concern, takes one very lopsided direction to ‘serve’ the community, under-inform people who use, when provided, public transport to instead visit recurring health risks, hip pocket costs and day to day frustration is alarming.

The B-Line day in, day out demonstrates a viable, workable solution the public turns to and now expects. Access to work, CBDs, to airports, universities and schools is a right for many yet sadly not it seems for those saddled geopolitically with the costly, forever toll and toll again ‘Military Road Problem’. Must everybody on the Beaches trying to get someplace be forced to drive and park? This is not good government policy, does not enhance community amenity. Simply put the dangers and forever cost are too high a price to pay for a fleeting 10 minute burst of commuter speed.

Thank you for this opportunity to make a submission in respect of this project. I object strongly to this project on the grounds of its risks to our community's health - both physical and mental - and to the irreversible destruction of the area's natural environment, with consequent loss of wildlife and loss of a significant area of beautiful public amenity and important heritage. Additionally, it beggars belief that this project can be driven forward by its proponents at such a pace with so little substantial consideration for alternatives, in particular those that rely principally on public transport options; and this without publication of details of a business case that would justify its adoption. In conjunction with this, it should be acknowledged that prior calculations and estimations of traffic growth and emerging patterns have been largely invalidated by the substantially modified behaviour of drivers and commerce since the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic.
I am particularly at a loss to understand how the proponents of this project can justify the establishment of unfiltered exhaust stacks - this in an area that is close to dense population and a large number of schools. I am not assured that the prerequisite measures will be in place to prevent significant harm from pollution.
I am particularly concerned with the planned destruction that will be caused to Flat Rock Gully, and with the fact that there are no firm answers as to how this area will look at the end of the project. There are too many unanswered questions in this regard. Additionally, the scope of monitoring and assessment of wildlife habitation that will be under threat appears to be all too pragmatic.
Please consider these above objections and go back to the drawing board for a sensible solution to the management of our region's traffic problems.

The environmental impact statement for this project by nature is so damaging and extensive that this project should not proceed .
The recent changes in work practices with Covid show that technology not polluting outdated modes of transport are the future.
I object to this project on moral ethical and cultural grounds and it is beyond comprehension that this government thinks they have the right to destroy this irreplaceable land forever and for generations to come for a time saving exercise today

The project will have a significant direct impact on Manly Dam Reserve, specifically in terms of it's freshwater ecology. The Reserve is a critical refuge for endangered species that are already under threat from increased fire frequency, drought, freshwater pollution. The banks of trees currently adjacent to Wakehurst Parkway are critical wildlife corridor for a number of endangered and threatened species and the only significant urban reserve acting as a buffer for the adjacent national park network. These corridors become increasingly important. With more people working from home going forward, the widening of this roadway, instead of alternative planning solutions, represents an ill thought out approach to infrastructure planning which should now be reconsidered in the context of COVID and ongoing demographic shifts away from centralised work, especially due to the local heritage, natural and social values of this significant strip of vegetation.

It will threaten the last remaining population of the Galaxias brevipinnis in the Sydney area, together with multiple threatened species such as the red crowned toadlet that lives in the habitat adjacent to the Wakehurst Parkway.

• Wakehurst Parkway cannot be widened to 4-6 lanes without destroying the bush at the top of Manly Dam and Garigal National Park. The ridge is simply too narrow for such a wide road.
• The road is too wide to have adequate runoff water treatment. Untreated water from the road will pour through the bush, scouring the land and filling streams below with sediment every time there is heavy rainfall. This will essentially eradicate small freshwater populations of invertebrates including threatened frog species. The proposed drainage processes from the EIS are inadequate.
• Street lighting along Wakehurst Parkway will cause light pollution which will affect the life cycles of nocturnal animals, causing them to die out from that area. The Reserve supports a population of the Eastern Pygmy Possums will be affected.
• Light from the road will be visible all through Manly Dam and Garigal National Park. The road is on a ridge, so light from the road will be visible for miles around.
• Encouraging articulated trucks and construction vehicles to use Wakehurst Parkway could result in accidents and spills that will have significant environmental impacts on Manly Dam and Garigal
National Park. A spill of toxic liquid will pour downhill directly into the bush and be extremely difficult to clean.
• There will be a lot of traffic on Wakehurst Parkway. Heavy construction vehicles going 80km/h will dominate the road for the next 30 years. Traffic noise will be heard all across the bush, particularly
at night. Truck movements for the key construction site on Wakehurst Parkway will have about a truck pre minute entering or leaving.
• Construction will destroy a large area of bushland at the top of Wakehurst Golf Course around the two water tanks. This area was declared by Sydney Water to be rich in endangered plant and animal species which are already threatened by climate change and increased bushfire frequency.
• The Aboriginal carvings along Engravings Trail will be under threat from road runoff, construction debris and possible blasting impacts

To whom it may concern,
I wish to lodge my objections to the beaches link tunnel based on the following:
- Non-filtered emission stacks where there is a high concentration of preschool, primary and secondary schools. This is unacceptable particularly given the increased car and diesel truck exhaust fumes containing extremely toxic substances including tiny particles that are hazardous for human respiratory and circulatory health.
- Lost opportunity in not filtering/ treating stack pollution – although the EIS suggests PM2.5 levels will not be significantly changed with the construction and operation of unfiltered stacks, we are already living in an environment where levels of PM2.5 and PM10 is above the level of what is considered safe and the EIS demonstrates that this will continue well past the tunnel opening. Would filtering stacks reduce PM 2.5 levels to acceptable levels? Or could a public transport alternative address our growing PM levels. The government has a duty of care to do what it can to reduce these levels now that it has monitored and confirmed the issue.
- Flat rock gully as dig site unsuitable due to known contamination of site containing asbestos, toxic gases and other unknown items that were legally allowed to be dumped there last century. flat rock gully is home to a range of species including small bird populations, rock wallaby, powerful owl, lizards and many more and disruption to this site would disrupt the environment and endanger this wildlife. The risk to the flat rock gully native wildlife corridor is unacceptable. In addition to this the risk to downstream contamination of other sites is unacceptable.
- The EIS states that the area North of the golf course in Cammeray will experience noise above limits across the duration of the project. Anzac Park School, Anzac Park, Cammeray Oval and KU Preschool (Green Park) will be noise affected above limits across various stages of the project. With my child due to attend Anzac Park, I have grave concerns about the impact this will have on children.

I object because of the impact to the Environment, the creek will dry out over the next few years, as well as you will pump untreated water into the creek which will go into Manly lagoon and then at Queenscliff beach into the ocean more than 100000l of untreated water a day. Also the exhaust vents which reach into the air which will put toxic unfiltered gases into the air is not ok. The Bally boys school will see a lot of traffic and pollution and noice and the pollution is meant to stay a certain distance from a school is not given. So I am not ok to build a tunnel with what kind of impact this has on the environment. The tunnel should have at least a public transport lane with current plans not having one.
Please take the plan and amend it.
Kind regards

Hello,

I am an advocate of well-designed infrastructure projects that benefit the wider community. I’m a resident of North Balgowlah and have no issue with such projects being undertaken near where I live.

I do however have some major reservations over the proposed Northern Beaches Tunnel as follows:

• Economic viability of the tunnel: The estimated cost is $14 billion, prior to any tender process so is likely to increase when the final scope of works is finalised. In the State Infrastructure Strategy 2012-2032, INSW concluded that the Northern Beaches Link was a lower priority for Government funding support than other projects because of lower traffic volumes, lack of through traffic, limited population growth etc. Other projects such as Western Sydney Airport and rail and road projects in Sydney’s population growth corridors must still be a much more suitable investment by the Government and make more economic sense.
• No dedicated public transport dedicated lane in the tunnels: The Government is targeting 30% reduction in private car commuting by 2038. There is no incentive offered to residents to catch public transport if there are no dedicated bus lanes. So providing a tunnel for cars is counter-intuitive to the reduction in private car usage.
• Lack of filtration of ventilation outlets: Errors in air quality assessments in projects such as West Connex do not provide confidence over modelling outcomes. Whilst the Department of Planning has engaged the NSW Chief Scientist in assessing the risk of air pollution to the population near air stacks, my uneducated suspicion is that the passage of time will show those assumptions to be incorrect by which point there could be irreversible health consequences for individuals affected.
• Location of the Balgowlah smoke stack: Based on the proposed tunnel exit point in Balgowlah, there needs to be a stack nearby. However, the result is that the stack ends up being situated at a low point in a residential catchment. This means that any air pollution either won’t disburse as easily as it should or means that the stack itself needs to be much higher than its surrounds to ensure extracted air is vented higher into the atmosphere, thereby potentially creating an eyesore. It results in an imperfect solution in either scenario. It should bring into focus how essential a new tunnel is at all, particularly in lieu of the success of the B-line bus route as a means to increase movement of commuters whilst simultaneously reducing the number of cars on the road.
• Side effects of increase in visitors to the Northern Beaches: Whilst this is likely to be beneficial to local businesses, there are already parking challenges around Manly and other beaches which will only be exacerbated if more people drive to the beach on the weekend instead of catching public transport there. Impacts will therefore not be felt just around the tunnel entry points but also in surrounding suburbs.

These issues need to be carefully considered now when assessing the merits of the project and should not be rushed under any circumstances.

Thank you