We live in Seaforth, with 2 young children attending Seaforth Public School. As a family we are immensely concerned with the impact the Beaches link tunnel will have on our health, the environment, safety of our our children and the overall affect it will have on the community especially as the construction phase will last a number of years.
The specific areas of particular concern are as follows:
1. Health
A. Chapter 10 of the EIS states that up to 532 residential receivers could be exposed to ground-borne noise levels above 45 dB(A) for a number of weeks on multiple occasions. The potentially affected residential receivers are mainly within Seaforth and in particular where we live. This is unacceptable especially considering NCA 53.3 is not considered for at-property noise treatment. As tunneling will be taking place 24/7 this will impact sleep and cause increased stress levels, especially as I work from home for the majority for the time and we have 2 school aged children who need to do their school work at home.
B. Seaforth Public School, in particular the increased noise levels through-out the construction, so both of my kids will be exposed to an increase of noise for years. The school needs to be upgraded with double glazed windows to allow for better learning and concentration. An independent dust and noise monitor station need to be installed during construction which will alert parents when the air quality measures exceed what is considered safe and healthy.
2. Poor air quality once the tunnel is completed due to unfiltered ventilation stacks. My son is currently attending Seaforth Public School and then will potentially go to Balgowlah Boys. It is unacceptable to the health of young children to have the stacks so close to so many schools. It is essential the stacks need to be filtered. While the argument that air quality will only worsen marginally, there is no guarantee this will be the case. On tunnel- completion, independent and regular monitoring of the air quality around Seaforth Public and Balgowlah Boys High School and Balgowlah North Public is imperative for at least 5 years to ensure the air quality is safe for children. Independent air quality monitoring also needs to be done throughout Seaforth and surrounds to ensure measures are not exceeding what’s been proposed in the EIS.
3. Extremely concerned about the Increased noise and danger due to a massive increase heavy vehicle movements. The EIS states that it is up to the contractor later to organize what route the heave vehicle trucks will take to move the spoil away. So there’s a risk trucks leaving the Balgowlah golf course construction site will move through Seaforth. There are so many children around at school pick up and drop off times that the truck could cause a fatal accident due to sheer size and volume moving through Seaforth. This route should be avoided as the Frenchs Forest route and the roundabout at Seaforth Village would not cope with that. Adding 40-50 heavy vehicles an hour to this scenario will cause accidents and chaos during this time. NSW Transport needs to provide regulations on what way and at what times these tracks can move during these times.
Environmental Impact:
1. The tunnel will cause a permanent loss of up to 96% of the base water flow of the Burnt Bridge Creek which means there will be no creek left. My house backs onto the creek and we use uses the cycle and walkway daily. The pathway along the creek provides shade and being away from the traffic and major roads allows us to take our smaller children. The ecological impact of the tunnel on the Burnt Bridge Creek is massive and will impact all the vegetation, flora and fauna. It’s also unacceptable that the Balgowlah Golf Course construction support site (BL10) will discharge 428,000l of waste water to the local storm water system Burnt Bridge Creek before it comes out at Queenscliff Lagoon, a place that sees a large volume of the community going to use the beach. This again will destroy this ecosystem. Another route and way to source water for tunneling needs to be found, it’s not acceptable that the tunneling will draw from our ground water risking all vegetation and flora along the Seaforth to Manly Lagoon corridor! There needs to be a review assessing the impact the reduced baseline flows in Burnt Creek will have on the ecosystem and vegetation.
Traffic congestion:
Impact of increased traffic will also have a major impact on all residents of Seaforth and surrounds as contraction begins. For anyone commuting into the city or trying to manage multiple school drop offs.
Overal this will have a massive negative impact on our community for years to come. There should be consideration toward alternative public transport routes to help reduce emissions. I have not spoken to anyone in the community who actually wants this tunnel and at this point. The time and the billions of dollars towards this project would be better used elsewhere.

Sincerely
Seaforth Resident

Surely COVID has shown us the value of places like Manly Dam. We MUST protect these unique places. The dominance of the car has passed. We can work from home, reduce pollution, live a life where we can breathe and enjoy our natural environment. I totally reject this proposal.

This construction threatens numerous endangered plant and animal species and aboriginal rock art sites, with close to 2000 established trees removed in Garigal National Park / Bantry Bay and Manly Dam Reserve.

This area covers a section of the Duffys Forest Ecological Community, a site with many highly endangered plant species, and a type of native bushland that is near extinct due to land clearing, development and weed infestation(1).
The EIS reveals that 1979 mature trees will be removed in Garigal National Park / Bantry Bay and Manly Dam Reserve(5) with replacement planting for only 339(6), replacing mature trees with only young saplings.

Fauna assessed in the area include numerous threatened species – including the Eastern Pygmy-possum, Powerful Owl, Rosenberg’s Goanna, Large-eared Pied Bat, Grey-headed Flying-fox, Red-crowned Toadlet, and the rare Galaxias brevipinnis, a climbing fish that is unchanged by evolution since the Gondwana era 60 million years ago.
The EIS states “Fauna can be sensitive to elevated noise, changing their behaviour and impacting their physiology… Fauna may initially desert the immediate area at the start of excavation activities due to increased noise and vibration levels… However, due to the extent of adjoining habitat, the initial displacement from the immediate area could become permanent. For less mobile species or breeding individuals, the effects of the high noise levels may be more acute.”(4).

The reason these areas have not been developed in the past is because we used to value our natural and indigenous heritage, and protect endangered flora and fauna – do we still value these things?

my objection to the proposed northern beaches tunnel is as follows:-
*the use of the Balgowlah golf course area and adjoining residential land for use as a construction site and as an access rd to/from Sydney rd
*the increased traffic on nearby residential streets as a result of the construction activity, including Ethel st, upper beach st, and wanganella st
*exhaust stacks proposed within the golf club land its height and emissions
*noise associated with heavy truck movements and machinery
*the impact on the amenity and health of residents
*the tunnel access at its proposed location onto the burnt bridge creek by pass
*the reverse curve alignment of the main tunnel as it traverses the area from Cammeray
to Northbridge
*lack of serious study of multi/smaller tunnel accesses for Manly ,Balgowlah and Fairlight destinations
*the timing of the EIS over the holiday period and lack of extension to comment on proposal
*the impact on traffic from the spit construction site ,will increased vehicle moment causing further disruption to through traffic
*lack of consideration to accessing the tunnels a lower level off the burnt bridge creek rdat a point just east of the Myrtle st overbridge

Objection.
This correspondence is AGAIST the Northern Beaches Tunnel.
I object to the Northern Beaches Tunnel and I will actively work against its planning approval and construction due to the following reasons:
1. The enormous cost of the proposal makes it financially unfeasible.
2. The EIS has demonstrated there are numerous environmental degradation issues as a direct and indirect result of the Tunnel.
3. The Tunnel will need to be funded and this will undoubtedly result in an increase in the cost of commuting from the Northern Beaches to the city and other areas of Sydney.
4. Due to Covid and the resulting work-from-home directions, traditional working arrangements have changed and this change in work location may continue for some time. This will result in a reduced level of road usage.
5. There are far superior options that would improve travel to the city, such as, expanding bus services like the B1 and fully utilising the existing three lanes of roadway rather than have the road taken up for parking.
6. The Tunnel proposal will force high density living onto suburbs that do not have sufficient local road networks to support higher usage.
Please do not build the tunnel!

I strongly object to the Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade. The health and wellbeing of the Northern Beaches residents I don't believe has been appropriately considered. How can unfiltered exhaust stacks be placed not only so close to so many family homes but also near schools/ childcare centres and shared spaces? Not to mention the damaging impacts it will have on the local environment including beaches, water ways and Manly Dam.
As a family we heavily use Manly Dam mountain bike trails as a way to get out together, get exercise and explore the outdoors. As it is one of the most populate mountain bike trails in the souther hemisphere, the impact on this will be devastating.
How are you proposing to replace this unbelievably amazing trail?
Instead public transport options SHOULD be considered and implemented.
What are the alternate public transport options you have considered as a viable alternative?

I am submitting the below concerns in opposition of the proposed development.

1. Pollution
ISSUE: Based on modelling, CR20 Berry Cottage Naremburn is forecast to see an increase in annual average PM10 if all projects proceed. This is a risk to the health of our most vulnerable babies and toddlers.
Between Berry Cottage and the Punch street ventilation outlet is the Naremburn residential area which by default should also expect to see an increase in Particulate Matter. Artarmon public school, Naremburn park and Artarmon park will also be impacted. This is an unacceptable redistribution of pollutants into areas where children and families reside
ASK: Should the project be approved, filtration be added to the ventilation outlet. Additionally, a secondary ventilation site be included to lower toxic output concentrations rather than it all going to a single stack.

2. Operational Noise (please see attached pdf)
ISSUE: Should the project be approved, the Naremburn residential area (NCA32.1) is located less than 200m from the major construction zone has not been considered at all for at-property treatment .
ASK: That the Naremburn residential area (NCA32.1) be made eligible for at-property noise reduction treatment

ISSUE: High noise activities are planned to be from 10:30pm to midnight
This will severely impact the ability for families to commence sleep each night resulting in sleep deprivation, a key contributor to mental health issues
ASK: Any high-noise activity be completed during daylight hours

Thank you

We need to allow for more trams to services the northern beaches as the infrastructure is outdated and cities need more public transport options, not just buses and cars. I appreciate the cycle lanes but more infrastructure for this form of transport is paramount in achieving a green city aspect as well having an integrated public transport system.

Please find attached 20210301 Beaches link EIS submission Sandy Ellison which contains my objections and comments.