Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

I am concerned about the effect of 6 years of building work similar to that that the poor people in Frenchs Forest have suffered with the road build for the new hospital.
I strongly do not feel any benefits would out weigh the 6 + years (lets be honest the hospital road build over ran by a year) of pollution, mess and inconvenience to people and traffic.
The solution I feel is not a new road/tunnel the solution is in my opinium public transport that combined with working from home. This is something that has proven over the last year to reduce the travel time to the city from the beaches in a healthy more natural way instantly.

Objection letter to the project due to the impact on the local area in particular the school my child goes to.

I am very concerned about significant impact of the tunnel on Balgowlah Boys Hight School (Bally Boys) students during the construction. These boys cant study in the middle of the construction with all the noise and dust surrounding them. It will be impossible for them to concentrate and it can case a lots of medical issues to them (headache, anxiety etc. ). The project must consider this. Why has Bally Boys not been given Community Receiver sensitivity status when its the closest shool. to the Beaches Link exhaust stack and construction site?

The environmental destruction and after effects of this project will be horrible. I object to unfiltered exhaust stacks, to toxic sludge being dug up, to water and air pollution for all children and elderly residents in particular... and for habitat loss for animals, especially in Manly Dam.
The traffic chaos will impact on the entire area for several years, not to mention parking and other rat runs onto local streets.
By encouraging cars there will be no other future talk of light rail or any other public transport, which is looking to the future.
I feel the entire project is not only too costly, but that the money could be better spend in others areas of Sydney west and in the surrounding satellite towns.
the quality of life and the environment is going to be impacted forever.

I am a resident of Northbridge and have been sailing a Laser dinghy at Northbridge Sailing Club for 25 years. The club is within walking distance of my home.
Like many in our fleet of Lasers I am a competitive sailor. I recently placed 4th in the GGM division at the State Laser titles, beaten by one of my NSC club mates who came 2nd. First and 3rd places were filled by the current and former World Champions.
To remain competitive at this level, we need to be able to sail proper racing courses. This is always a challenge at Northbridge, because of the geography, but we manage in most wind conditions.
After reading the EIS, 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 most possibly 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.
Yours sincerely,
Ian Clare

I object to the Beaches Link EIS for the folllowing reasons:
1)The dive site in Flat Rock Creek Gully has been recognised as leading to destruction to trees (390) and threats to flora and fauna in an area which has undergone considerable regeneration in the the past 40 years successfully restoring previous destruction brought about by rubbish disposal by government.
2) Pollution through unfiltered stacks such as the one proposed near the Anzac Public School. When compared to underground tunnels in Madrid and Tokyo it is obvious that this tunnel will not be using international best practice in its tunnel and stack ventilation proposals.
3) The proposed extraction of Middle Harbour sedimentation which has been identified as toxic. The plans for its disposal in land sites in the Middle Harbour including Flat Rock Reserve is dangerous and the process is not transparent
4) Traffic and congestion and roads on many surrounding suburbs (Cammeray, Willoughby, Naremburn, Northbridge) during construction will be impacted. Outcomes predicted: Increased road and predestrian accidents, potholes, need for increased road maintenance, congestion, effects of heavy truck traffic, pollution.
5) Alternatives: consider other options that are conducive to a more sophisticated and forward thinking approach to the movement of population such as a Dee why to Chatswood Mass Transit Corridor - posed many years ago but knocked out by political agendas of the time.
6) Once beautiful harbour areas are destroyed by roadways no longer needed, it will be difficult for future generations to regenerate a liveable Sydney
7) The lack of a social cost benefit analysis indicates a lack of transparency about, and understanding of, the impact of this Beaches Link

I object to the project for the following reasons:
1. There are many deleterious effects to the environment, many of which are recognised in the EIS and accepted as being due to cost pressures. What price health??
2. There appears to be only little benefits for the enormous cost and the long term disruption to the local community.
3. The easing of accessibility to the Northern Beaches will have a significant increase on weekends and non peak periods, in traffic congestion to Balgowlah, Manly Vale and Manly (which is currently excessive) . This will particularly be the case in summer.

I strongly object to the Beaches Link tunnel because I have grave concerns about the following:
• The proposed Dive Site is to be located in an area that is currently densely foliaged and will require the removal of over 300 mature trees for this operation.
• It is in an area that was originally a dumping site over a number of years and contains many potentially toxic components that will be disturbed in this operation.
• The material dredged from the estuary in the tunnel excavation is known to contain toxic elements some of which will undoubtedly be released into the water.
• The excavated material will also be stockpiled in the Dive Site location awaiting transportation. During heavy rain this has the potential for contaminated run-off finding its way into Flat Rock Creek and hence into Long Bay.

I am very concerned about the environmental impact, I have read about in regards to the Burnt Bridge Creek. This is an extremely important and vital ecological corridor for a wide range of small animals and birds, as well as the vegetation and tees and grasses. Our property backs onto the creek and bush so we are extremely worried about this. When you walk on the footpath along the creek to see a wide variety of animals using the water ... from the ducks and bush turkeys, as well as small turtles in the water. At times there is not much water flow but this is better than none! The ecosystems in the creek corridor rely on this vital stretch of water. I do not object to the tunnel but it must not be at the cost of local ecosystems.

I am objecting to the proposed Beaches Link tunnel because I am concerned the NSW government is trying to rush through a design that has not fully considered community concerns and has: significant impacts on the local environment; construction impacts on the health and the amenity of residents from noise, dust and traffic; marginal benefits in terms of reduced travel times from Manly to the City; and increased traffic and development pressures the tunnel will bring to Manly and surrounds when operational.
The Environmental statement does not provide confidence that impacts will be addressed by failing to provide clear and detailed guidance on controls to be implemented. In many instances the statement simply recommends detailed studies will be undertaken by the contractor to address and manage predicted impacts or as in the case with local road upgrades and rat runs leaving it to the Northern Beaches Council to address. My concern is if it isn’t specified in the Environmental Statement then what incentive is there for the contractor to do the right thing? More likely they will do what’s easiest and the cheapest without fully addressing or minimising the impacts.
The Environmental Statement highlights several biodiversity impacts that are not mitigated. The base flow in the Freshwater Creek will reduce by 79% during construction and up to 96% of flow will be lost once the tunnel is operational. It won’t therefore be a creek anymore. The current retention dam at the Balgowlah golf course will be removed. This loss of water will have a serious and unacceptable impact on the local flying fox community adjacent to Balgowlah Road which is nationally threatened and a keystone species for our forests and woodlands.
Toxic sediments in Middle harbour and contaminated materials from capped landfill at flat rock gully reserve will be disturbed leading to possible pollution of public amenity spaces, local habitat and Clontarf beach. Widening of the Wakehurst Parkway to a 40m wide road will impact important and threatened species such as the Large Eared Pied Bat, the Eastern Pygmay Possum and the Red Crowned Toad. The Environmental Statements highlights water quality design targets cannot be met on the ridge of Wakehurst Parkway - the water quality targets set by the Environmental Statement were exceeded due to rainfall totals every month during 2020. The project is literally planning to fail by accepting surface runoff will exceed water quality targets and polluting surface hydrology. The Environmental Statement fails to specify how this risk is to be mitigated. if it isn’t specified in the Environmental Statement then what incentive is there for the contractor to do the right thing.
The Environmental statement lacks details on how impacts from construction traffic and construction workforce parking on residents in vicinity of Balgowlah Golf Course will be mitigated
Section 6.9.2 of the environmental statement states “due to the generally constrained nature of the temporary construction support sites, only limited car parking will be available on sites”. Section 8.4.4 indicates car parking will be provided at Blagowlah Golf Course support site (BL10) and “no loss of parking on adjacent streets is anticipated during construction”. The construction workforce will be encouraged to use public transport including the B-Line, however the B-Line buses do not stop near to the Balgowlah Construction site, requiring workers to change to local buses at Manly Vale or Mosman.
Parking on local streets including Maretimo, Violet, Upper Beach, Audrey and Waganella is already at capacity during normal school days. Blocked or partially blocked driveways are a common occurrence. Over 1850 light vehicles will visit the Balgowlah construction site every day. Although the construction site will operate 24hrs a day most workers will be on site from 6am to attend daily briefings before starting work. Workers vehicles will need to all be accommodated on site but the Statement does not specify how much parking is to be provided. There is an assumption that the contractor will provide enough parking for the expected construction workforce who want to drive rather than take public transport. The contractor will only do what they are required to do and the environmental statement needs to clearly direct the contractor to provide enough car parking spaces for the anticipated workforce, and state that construction workers are not to park in the local streets including Maretimo, Violet, Upper Beach, Audrey, Waganella and beyond.
The Statement blandly deals with the potential for increased local traffic and rat runs by handing over the issue to the Northern Beaches Council to deal with. The Statements suggests the only local road not expected to be a rat run will be Maretimo Street due to alignment of the link road, and restricting north-south traffic movement. It is totally wrong in my opinion not to address in detail mitigation of increased local traffic flows along Ethel, Upper Beach and Wanganella Streets. There may be different budgets to pay for works, but the two issues should not be dealt with separately and as if unrelated.
Construction noise over a period of many years is of considerable concern. The Environmental Statement highlights that NCA 48.1 (includes Balgowlah Boys School) will likely experience noise levels of 10 dBA+ above normal and possibly greater levels depending on specific construction activities. Elevated night-time noise levels will likely affect sleep at times throughout the construction period. Constant elevated noise levels over prolonged periods will undoubtedly impact both the education of Balgowlah Boys students but also the mental health of residents. Again, the Statement is not completely clear on mitigation controls other than specifying acoustic shed for the tunnel portal and encouraging the contractor to use low emission machinery. There is a requirement for the contractor to conduct construction noise studies and monitoring, but the Statement fails to specify and identify specific measures required for impacted properties, including noise reduction measures at the recipient location.
Building the tunnel will bring more people to Manly and the southern end of the Northern Beaches. It will encourage more people to drive to the beaches in the summer months increasing pressure on local infrastructure particularly housing, roads and parking. There will be increased pressure for development opening the area to higher density housing which in turn will lead to pressure on roads and public transport.
The project will cost $14bn providing an estimated time savings of 27 minutes for someone driving from Brookvale to the Sydney CBD (comparing 2016 traffic flow data and predicted worst case peak future travel predictions). History shows when you build more roads, you induce demand and 2+ years later you are back to the same level of congestion you started with. At the start of the am peak I currently can travel by bus from Sydney Road, Balgowlah to Wynyard in less than 20mins. The return bus journey at the start of the pm peak will take up to 35mins, but usually less. My commute time has remained the same for the past 10 years. Claiming people’s commute times will reduce by 20 or 27mins once the tunnel is built is misleading. Without the tunnel I do not see my commute time changing much, although by restricting parking outside shops in Mosman , Cremorne, Neutral Bay and creating dedicated 24hr bus lanes along Military Road, traffic would certainly flow quicker and more people would be encouraged to catch the bus. Spending some of the $14bn on strategically placed local car parks for shopping and park & ride would compensate for the loss of street parking in these communities.
Although I live close to the tunnel portal at Balgowlah, I am likely never to use it and will only experience marginal improvements (if any), while being subjected to 6+ years of construction noise, construction traffic, reduced air quality and loss of local amenity and wildlife experience.

I object the construction of the tunnel for road vehicles. New infrastructure should be for energy efficient public transport. The government should not be encouraging more private vehicles on the road. The irreversible cost to the environment is too great

I object to this project being a road tunnel and not a Metro rail tunnel for the following reasons:
Metro/Rail would transfer move more more passengers more efficiently.
Metro/Rail would be for ALL not just people with parking the other end.
Metro/Rail will mean no unfiltered smoke stacks pumping toxic fumes into very densely populated areas like Cammeray.
Metro/Rail would mean a high-density hub could be made at the stations to accommodate the future growth of Sydney (such as what is being done at Crows Nest)
Metro/Rail would be cheaper and quicker to get up and running.
Metro/Rail would take people OUT of cars and onto public transport with the added benefit of reducing pollution further.
Metro/Rail would improve safety - we know that many elderly people visit their elderly friends and relatives in hospitals and having a Metro/Rail at Northern Beaches hospital (instead of driving being the only way) would give elderly people the option of not having to drive. Almost every day there is an old person who drives into something or someone. As we move toward being an older population let's provide alternatives to being forced to drive to retain independence.

Sydney road tolls increase by way more than inflation and that is just not sustainable. People will still avoid the tolls (refer to CCT for example and how government own modelling was way off.)

When Mrs Berejiklian was in opposition she was against unfiltered smoke stacks.. now she is creating more with longer tunnels and therefore more pollution in a high density area. Why?

On Facebook where Willoughby Living has over 30k of members not ONE person said they were in favour of a road tunnel over a metro. Almost everyone agrees that the Northern Beaches have long been ignored and I for one, moved from the Northern Beaches for that precise reason... relying on infrequent buses and when it rains you are an hour late to work. I would never have moved if there was a Metro.

Please, please reconsider a Metro over a road tunnel.

1. I'm disappointed to see traffic lights are proposed at the Balgowlah exit impacting traffic entering the tunnel and traffic exiting via the new link road (to Sydney Rd). This would appear to unnecessarily add congestion both inside and outside the tunnel, thereby increasing noise, fumes and driving time.
2. With the expected reduced traffic along Manly Road / Burnt Creek Deviation, will the intersection with Sydney Road be reconfigured? In particular allowing two lanes of traffic to cross towards Seaforth.

Hello, as a Seaforth local with 2 children, 1 at Seaforth Public School and the other at Harbourview and KU, I strongly oppose the Northern Beaches tunnel. Below are some of my concerns:

- Construction will increase traffic and negatively impact our local lives for over 7 years. This is simply unacceptable for all families in Seaforth, Balgowlah, Manly Vale and surrounds. Traffic and congestion in the local area will be dangerous, not only for drivers, but also pedestrians, many of whom are local school kids.
- The number of trucks and large vehicles driving thorough Seaforth and surrounding areas will be extremely dangerous and cause severe traffic issues. There will be an estimated 1 truck every 1-2 minutes carrying soil. These trucks will likely go through Seaforth, making Frenchs Forest Road noisy and dangerous. Especially around the bend near Seaforth Public School. This is unacceptable.
- Local families will be living in a construction zone for 7+ years. This will cause stress, anxiety and mental health issues for the local community. How does the NSW government propose to support this?
- Like many people in the community, I have asthma. The construction, dust, soil and drilling will severely impact the health of thousands on asthmatics and people with other respiratory health issues.
- The tunnel is not a viable option for the needs of Northern Beaches’ residents. We need more public transport options, not a tunnel made for cars.
- Ihas been proven time and time again that more roads and more highways do not reduce traffic and congestion. Perhaps the NSW government should consider alternatives that do not rely on 7+ years of construction at a cost of billions.
- Rather than building a tunnel that will cause severe and negative impacts on the lives of thousands of local residents, has the NSW government considered alternatives? Why not make Military Road clear way 24/7? Why not work with the Business community to review work hours and apply staggered start times? This will spread the peak hour commute and decrease traffic.
- The tunnel will negatively impact local schools including Balgowlah Boys, Seaforth Public School and many other schools. It will be extremely stressful and impossible for teachers to provide a safe and acceptable learning environment during 7+ years of construction. Likewise, students will find it impossible to focus on learning with all the construction going on around them. This will cause stress and mental health issues for hundreds of students.
- The tunnel will impact local biodiversity. I am extremely concerned about the impact to Burnt Creek and where the waste water will flow.
- Similar to most families in the community, I’m also extremely concerned about the pollution impacts of the tunnel. Not only about the exhaust stacks, but also the pollution that we will be subjected to over 7+ years of construction.

The way we live and work has changed since Covid. There must be a better and more innovative way to reduce traffic and increase public transport options and usage. A tunnel is NOT the answer.

Regards,
Natasa

I am particularly concerned about the destruction of the Flat Rock Reserve where a construction site will be placed. This remarkable nature reserve is treasured by the whole community. It contains beautiful trees, ancient rocks, and many species of birds and animals. It is a domain of peace and quiet, with gullies, creeks and bushland pathways, allowing members of the community to appreciate nature and wildlife so close to their homes. At all hours of the day, from early morning first light to late evening, Flat Rock Reserve attracts many people who wish to hike, wander or cycle through the pathways, appreciating the nature and the birds, so close to home. A construction site will ruin all this; beautiful angophora trees and other trees and ferns will be cut down, giant sandstone rocks smashed up, bush paths and gullies will be bulldozed, and birds and animals will be killed or will flee. The community will lose this valuable place. And when it comes time to remove the construction site, after at least five years, it will not be possible to restore what was there before; it will never be the same. And meanwhile, for this long period of time, the community will be deprived the use of the reserve, was well as having to put up with the appearance, the noise and the disturbance of a massive construction site, with trucks coming and going all day and night. There were much better options for the construction site, locations that were not beautiful natural reserves, so I cannot see why it was decided to destroy Flat Rock Reserve. It is a shameful thing to do.

We live near Burnt Bridge Creek, a natural corridor of crucial environmental and community significance which stretches through several suburbs in the Balgowlah/Seaforth area, and empties into Manly Lagoon.
The creek supports a variety of indigenous species, including endangered grey-headed flying foxes.
In addition, the creek is a central part of community life in this area, providing thousands of people from surrounding suburbs with an opportunity for exercise and interaction with nature.
The EIS notes the creek is “a vital ecological corridor of regenerated habitat that provides a range of important habitats for a diversity of local flora and fauna.”
The Beaches Link project, as it currently stands, will turn Burnt Bridge Creek into little more than a storm-water drain.
A loss of 79 per cent of water (baseflow) is expected during construction, and in the longer term this could rise to as much as 96 per cent.
Northern Beaches Council’s submission to the EIS says:
“The EIS trivialises what would be significant hydrological and ecological impacts to Burnt Bridge Creek. Up to 96% reduction in base flow would result in the permanent loss of (bedrock) run habitat and associated biotic communities would also disappear. The creek would essentially function as a storm water channel...the waterway would become a series of disconnected pools with poor water quality and an impoverished macroinvertebrate community During dry periods these pools would dry up entirely. Other impacts include effects on riparian vegetation and other terrestrial flora and fauna (protected flying foxes etc) reliant to some degree on available freshwater or aquatic communities.”
There is a need for improved transport in our area. However, projects which give rise to such immense damage end up hurting the communities they are intended to help. We cannot support the Beaches Link project until these significant community and environmental harms are addressed.

My objection is by way of attachment.
Submission attached

I have provided by arguments in the attached pdf.

Please find attached my objection to this project.

I do not object to the project overall, but do object to the effect the project will have on Burnt Bridge Creek especially in North Balgowlah. I understand that water flows will decrease by up to 96%. This would be a disaster for the creek and its environment. The area is used on a very regular basis as a small patch of wilderness by my family, and any destruction of the area, as effectively implied in the EIS will seriously affect our general amenity. I ask that alternatives be found to maintain adequate flow in the creek. Thank you.