Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

As a registered WIRES rescuer and a long time north Seaforth resident I am familiar with the unique and irreplaceable bush environment that is at risk should this project go ahead, and the many creatures that rely on it. Having read the relevant sections of the EIS carefully I do not see the mitigating measures needed that might reassure me.
Manly Dam/Wakehurst Parkway:
Unfortunately, we have far too much firsthand experience with the impact of major developments on wildlife in this area. The Northern Beaches Hospital development forced wildlife onto road and further south into ever smaller areas of bush, leading to a significant (and ongoing) number of deaths at the intersection and along Wakehurst Parkway. Given the constraints of reduced habitat, car strikes are already regular occurrences. Personally, I have responded to multiple swamp wallabies killed over a single week. The fines meted out to contractors for breaches of environmental conditions during the NB Hospital roadworks, and for the Mona Vale Rd upgrade, highlight the extremely high risk to fauna – and the failure of project managers to protect them as required.
The plan outlined in the EIS for fencing the Wakehurst Parkway site during construction of the tunnel portal and road widening is certain to fail. It is simply no possible to reduce and fragment habitat without forcing wildlife out onto roads and into contact with people or to reduce their food and shelter sources to the extent they become chronically stressed. Stressed animals from Manly Dam are already killed on Burnt Bridge deviation having followed the wildlife corridor east. It is impossible to even imagine how a project of this magnitude can prevent the large scale loss of wildlife, including numerous precious, threatened species – both during the many years of the construction phase and due to long term impacts of contamination on the Manly Dam water catchment, the fragmentation and loss of habitat and inadequate fauna crossings.
In particular, I would like to highlight the high risk of contaminated run off from the ridge both during construction and during operation of the extended road along Wakehurst Parkway. This has the potential to contaminate and degrade both Manly Dam itself and the entire catchment.
I would also like to raise the issue of lighting. If the new wide road is lit it will have a detrimental impact on insects, nocturnal and diurnal animals. Yet, it if is not lit, it will potentially be dangerous for motorists. Lights would also disrupt the use of the propose wildlife underpasses.
Wildlife underpasses: The tunnel proposed in the EIS are not adequate to facilitate the safe movement of most species and, therefore, will fail to keep many animals safe and will not protect genetic diversity. Research shows tunnels put some animals at risk of predation. Larger animals, especially macropods, are reluctant to use dark tunnels. The community has long asked for a substantial wooded over pass to link Manly Dam Reserve with Garigal National Park, independent of the tunnel planning. This must be a minimum requirement should the project proceed.
Removal of 2,000 trees:
The EIS provides chilling reading given that close to 2,000 trees will be removed, including areas known to be rich in biodiversity and inhabited by endangered species. The mitigation measure proposed is to have pre checks and a wildlife officer on scene. This is not sufficient.
Should the trees be removed a much more sophisticated planning and monitoring program must be put in place, before and during removal. Prior to removal a cool burn should be carried out by Indigenous fire practitioners – as the smoke moves only as fast as the slowest creatures. This would encourage wildlife to move safely out of the zone before the arrival of heavy equipment. Beyond the felling area additional ‘hollows’ must be installed in advance to help accommodate the displaced wildlife and supplementary feeding should be considered beyond the construction zone. During the felling itself registered wildlife rescuers and a vet should be onsite, including at least one wildlife rescuer vaccinated to handle bats. Without such care, the felling of so many trees will not just be a massacre of invaluable flora but will also lead to the direct or indirect killing of many protected native birds and animals.
Burnt Bridge Creek:
The EIS reports that Burnt Bridge Creek will be subject to a 79% loss of base flow during construction and up to a 96% loss of base flow over the long term. Having sought advice from academics with expertise in this field, it is clear that the tunnel project will lead to the death of this entire water systems with unknown impacts on the affected catchments and the flora and fauna communities within them. These include a community of endangered grey-headed flying foxes that are protected under both state and Federal laws.
The impacts on Burnt Bridge Creek, the riparian zone and surrounding catchment will lead to massive negative impacts on ecosystem and large scale deaths of native species. This is not acceptable under any circumstances and is likely to be vigorously challenged by many members of the community.
In summary:
Overall, the EIS makes for terribly depressing reading as it trivialises the profound impacts on our unique and much loved conservations areas that should be protected for all citizens and all generations. At every step it brushes aside impacts – for instance claiming flying foxes are accustomed to noise or that Manly Dam’s amazing galaxias fish is pollution tolerant. The scientists informing the EIS well know that the project will impose much larger noise and contamination impacts on these and other species and they fully understand the damage caused by cumulative impacts. It is beyond irresponsible, and simply scientifically inaccurate, to ignore cumulative impacts on ecosystems.
The EIS foreshadows the loss of invaluable and unique flora and fauna with only cursory and ineffective measures proposed to offset the devastating impacts of the construction and operation of the Beaches Link tunnel. There are many, many other negative community and environmental impacts. However, these will be raised by other individuals and groups. I do not support this project.

To whom it may concern,

I object to the tunnel project as it stands. I am a resident of North Balgowlah with two young children. We go on walks and bike rides along Burnt Bridge Creek several times a week to enjoy the natural beauty of the area. My children observe the flowing creek, flying foxes and have seen other fauna such as eels, turtles and many species of bird. The EIS for the tunnel project has shown that the creek will reduce in flow, that the flying foxes will lose much of their habitat and much needed water source, and that the general flora and fauna will be negatively impacted by the project. We moved to the area largely due to its natural beauty. The tunnel will reduce this and my children will see it’s detrimental impact on the plants and animals they love and learn about, not to mention a reduction in quality of air due to unfiltered smoke stacks.

I would like to see no negative impact to local flora and fauna along Burnt Bridge Creek and a sustained flow of the creek. I would like the smoke stacks to be filtered and guaranteed not to reduce the quality of air my children, and the children attending local schools are breathing. Until these issues are addressed I do not support how the tunnel is proposed to be built.

Regards
Cate Webster

I don't think the benefits of the tunnel will come any where close to making the toll it will have on life in Balgowlah worth it. If your aim is to destroy a vibrante, local community this tunnel is well on the way to achieving that. Aside from the obvious issues around the pollution throughout the life of the project, particularly during the building phase and the impact that will have on the children at school in the local areas, for example Balgowlah Boys and St Cecilia's, not to mention St Kieran's and Seaforth Public, but the impacts will also be detrimental to the wildlife in the local area.

From a personal perspective, the fact that we will have to live through a minimum of 6 years of construction and disruption is unacceptable. Add to this the fact that your hours of work are 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and whilst you claim this will take place underground I do not believe that this will not cause disruption. I'm also really looking forward to , "Outside standard construction hours, no receivers are predicted to be noise affected, except for during short term intersection works at Sydney Road. During short term intersection works, which need to occur at night under a road occupancy licence, up to 548 receiver buildings are predicted to be noise affected."

Of more concern to me is that increased level of traffic that we will experiencing in our neighbourhood. Seaview Street is already a rat-run, where cars travel far too fast at all hours of the day. Previous attempts to implement traffic calming measures have been rejected by council, which means many of the residents are fearful of when, not if an accident will happen. The increase in vehicles both from people cutting through and the additional parking from workers in the area will make our streets even more dangerous.

The increase in traffic including trucks on Sydney Road is yet another example of where Balgowlah will be further destroyed. Whilst the statistics you state imply there will be little change to traffic levels, this does not account for the number of trucks that will be waiting before they are scheduled to pick up their loads, and for where they will have to wait to fill up.

I do not believe that enough due diligence has been performed in the EIS. Specifically:
- There are major errors in identifying schools. My children's school is listed as a "place of worship" and not a school.
- Non reputable companies (like Ecotech) have been used to measure base-line air pollution (They have been sacked from several projects in Sydney). Measurement periods were made during a major bushfire catastrophe and a pandemic. Measurements are therefore not representative of forecasted changes.
- There was no specific design for water quality preservation. The EIS contains copy-pasted fluff that was not specific to this project.
- "Water Quality Ponds" do not improve water quality: they are a major risk to water quality. Major rainfall events will have overflows bringing pollution into Manly Dam and Queenscliff lagoon. This risk is not identified in the EIS, and copy-pasted content does not have project-specific solutions. There are no water treatment plants planned to be built for operational filtration of water that needs to be returned to the ocean via local waterways.
- No provisions have been made to control subcontractor behaviour in zones outside of the project envelope: Where will contractors park their private vehicles? Where will they have lunch or park their cars/trucks to take a break or nap? Where will they wait until their cargo is needed or until the site is ready for them? What if someone speeds in a school zone, how can we complain? What if someone uses private property as a toilet or uses a hose or tap, how do we report their behaviour? Contractors are notorious for flouting the rules, and they communicate amongst themselves to avoid council enforcement officers.

I object to this project on the following grounds:
. permanent or significant destruction of flat rock gully environment.
. Severe disturbance of the peaceful environment during construction.
. Great street to the wild life which would be destroyed forever.
. Impact on hundreds or thousands of nature lovers who use the nature reserve as a peaceful relaxing place for families.
. Severe pollution of the waterways during construction with loss of wildlife.
. Expected cost blow out if track record is a yardstick.

The NSW government should list to the local residents and make substantial changes to this project

Regards

Bernard Carrasco

At the completion of this project there is no benefit to the Naremburn and other lower north shore communities. There will be more vehicles in the area accessing and egressing the tunnels and seeking parking. We will be left with disturbed contamination at Cammeray, Flat Rock Gully and Middle Harbour and Northbridge Baths will present a risk for swimmers. We will have lost forest and fauna in Flat Rock Gully and school students will be breathing unfiltered air from the stacks. In this 21st century, developing infrastructure for the movement of cars is contra to the imperative of developing mass transport options that contribute to creating a sustainable world.

I ask for a full stage 2 contamination assessment and for a publicly available assessment of the Dee Why to Chatswood mass transit option BEFORE any approvals are given. The EIS needs to be re-issued with this information included so the public can fully understand the risks and compare the benefits.

For the five plus years of construction, thousands of children playing sport in the area will be adversely affected. On their commute to school by bus, by cycle or on foot, they will be competing with 900 daily construction vehicle movements on Flat Rock Drive and 3 million tonnes of spoil being removed. Adding this to the extensive vehicle movements and work related to the Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway upgrade, our children will experience heavy construction on the lower north shore for at least 7 years. Personally, our commute from Naremburn to Willoughby to look after grand children will be a nightmare.

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 even potentially 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.

I live in Serpentine Crescent at North Balgowlah and I wish to object to the proposal for the following reasons:
I object to the building of a tunnel which will be used for cars. Where is the vision and thought in this proposal? Why has this been forced onto the community without any other options? I believe light rail and better bus connections would help reduce the need for cars to be used. This is a terrible waste of money - there is no doubt the cost will be more than it is quotes at present. The public deserves the best value for money and I don’t believe this is the best we can get. The proposed toll on the tunnel is prohibitive - people will try to avoid it, causing traffic rat runs in local residential streets.
I object to the destruction of Balgowlah golf course for the purpose of a construction support site. This is a wonderful green space with hundreds of old trees which are to be removed – trees which provide food and homes for birds and wildlife. When complete it will have playing fields and also a ventilation stack. This will be an eyesore in the middle of this beautiful green space and playing sport near it will cause the users to be breathing in toxic fumes.
I object to the destruction of Burnt Bridge Creek with contamination from the construction of the tunnels. This is an area of great biodiversity and I cannot imagine why it would have to be destroyed. It is an area which so many residents enjoy with trees and shade. The water from the creek makes its way to the Ocean at Queenscliff and no one wants to swim in polluted water from this project.
I object strongly to the use of unfiltered emission stacks in an area where there are schools, preschools and homes in close proximity. Thousands of schoolchildren and residents will have pollution from these two tunnels raining down on them for the future. This is not acceptable.
I object to the destruction of part of Manly Dam. This is an area of importance and should be protected not destroyed. There are areas of Aboriginal significance in Manly Dam and these cannot be destroyed. Areas of significance can be damaged by drilling and boring nearby and also by vibrations. It is a wildlife corridor and every part of it should be preserved and protected.
I object to the dredging of Middle Harbour with the possibility of harmful toxins being released in the water and polluting the Seaforth swim areas and surrounds.
I request an end to this proposal. There needs to be more consideration of better public transport options in the Northern Beaches.
Thank you.

This submission contains my objection to the fact that the unfiltered emissions from the ventilation stacks of the Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection tunnels will have significant impact on those working and living in tall buildings in North Sydney, Crows Nest and St Leonards, as well as detrimental health impacts on the 10 000+ school children in the local area.

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 even potentially 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.

The Northern Beaches access tunnel across middle harbour will greatly affect the Northbridge Sailing Club.
The club's main activity is Sunday sailing which uses both the East/West as well as the North/South arms of the area.
The proposed works will divide the assigned course area almost exactly in half. Unless the course area can be completely used, the sailing will effectively become difficult and unattractive.
It may well cause the demise of the club which for more than 50 years has provided recreation and has taught hundreds of children to sail.
I request that Transport NSW consults with Northbridge Sailing club in order to minimize the effect on the club.
Personally speaking, I have just turned 80 and hope to sail a few more years at Northbridge. I hope a good accommodation can be reached.

Submission by Orestes Vandoros 23/02/2021

Our industrial property, situated at 1-3 Waltham Street, Artarmon 2064, may/will be acquired by NSW government as compulsory acquisition as part of the Beach Link & Gore Hill freeway project.
Almost three years ago I received a call from RMS advising me of possible compulsory acquisition of our Artarmon industrial warehouse property that also houses our family’s Australian Designs & Imports business as well as our tenant’s business.
Over this period, I have closely followed the progress and design development the of the proposed major project Beach Link & Gore Hill Freeway Connection project.
As per current published Environmental Impact Statement our property is marked to be used as “Laydown”. I understand that this means a “place to store materials”.
If so, how does a “Laydown” and the short-term use of our land justifies the demolition of our 2-storey building of 2200sqm + 39 car pack spaces and the subsequent required relocation of our businesses and the one of our tenants.
My family’s company purchased this industrial building to operate as warehouse, office, and showroom for my family’s owned and operated business.
This property is an irreplaceable investment and essential to the continued operations of my family’s business.
After 20 plus years operating our business in Artarmon, the impact of a forced migration and unknown future relocation of our business is extremely stressful to myself, my family, to our long-term employees, and our tenants.
We hope that due consideration will be given to our extreme concerns expressed in this submission. My intention in expressing my objection is that I will be able to retain ownership of my property and to continue to operate my family’s business in the premises that we purchased specifically for its strategic location to serve our business needs.

Hello,
I am writing this submission as I have deep reservations around the proposed construction of the Beaches Link tunnel.
Having spent considerable time reviewing the relevant documents I am very concerned about the negative and non-reversible damage this project will certainly have on the surrounding flora and fauna, as well as the long term health impacts on the neighbouring population. Although the extent of this damage can possibly be debated, what is undeniable is that the tunnel will have a negative impact on the surrounding environment, whereas the benefits to the community from better access to the city is negligible at best.
I therefore would like to lodge my objection to the Northern Beaches Tunnel.
Regards

Paul

This whole Northern Beaches Tunnel project will have significant impact on Clontarf, Balgowlah and Seaforth residents as well as having permanent environmental damage to our area. Build up of toxic sediment by using the Middle Harbour coffer dams will pollute Clontarf Beach for years, causing unknown medical problems for families. Is there money 'allocated' for this? Local traffic congestion at Seaforth for 7 years (or longer) will cause unknown chaos and accidents. Has money been allocated for this probability? With trucks moving with heavy loads every minute, every day for 7 years (or longer) over the Spit Bridge or Roseville Bridge will be turmoil and chaos. The noise from 24/7 drilling will cause damage to homes - is there a clause included in your EIS for money allocated to compensate residents for all those damaging effects?
There is concern too about air quality. It is known that fumes from heavy transport and dust particles from excavating can cause irreparable lung problems. The exhaust stacks should be filtered to help prevent this pollution. Has money been allocated for such medical outcomes?
on behalf of the residents, I object strongly to the NBT.

My submission is primarily in relation to what I believe the impact of the project will be on Northbridge Sailing Club (NSC). for the reasons outlined below I fear the project could result in effectively "killing off" NSC. It may be possible to "save" the Club, but only with what I believe would need to be considerable ongoing consultation with the Club and the provision of a range of financial and infrastructure type assistance.
I have been a member of NSC for 20 years, and made a life member in 2020 for my contribution to the Club primarily as a result of my contribution as Company Secretary of the club for 15 years up to 2020. Through my role a Company Secretary I am aware of the ongoing struggle for NSC to gain new members and retain members and the associated financial struggle the Club has had to remain viable and provide a great community sporting outlet for the Willoughby and surrounding areas. Over the period of my role on the Committee of NSC I have seen its viability hinge on encouraging new, mainly youth members through a volunteer run learn to sail programme; and to retain those members, and more established members through running sailing races predominately for several dinghy classes of sailboat in the Summer and some yacht racing in winter.
Over the past couple of years NSC faced a significant challenge in relation to funding significant structural work required for the pylons under the Club deck and clubhouse, and it was only with the assistance of some funding from both Federal and local government that those essential works could be undertaken.

From what I have read of the detail of the proposed work, will cause significant disruption to the waterway area between NSC and the Spit bridge area and extending to Seaforth Bluff area and down towards Quakers Hat, over what will be at least 3 years and probably more, and will dramatically impact on the capacity of NSC to run its learn to sail programme and certainly any proper sailing races which in turn will have a devastating effect on the capacity of NSC to retain existing members and entice new members, which in turn will have a potentially fatal impact on the financial viability of NSC, such that the Club may not "survive" the construction period, and will be extremely difficult if not impossible to "revive" after the construction concludes.
Based on my long experience as to how the learn to sail and introduction to sail racing programme has been organized at NSC, I believe the project will significantly impact the ability of the Club to run the programme and entice people to sign up. The annual signing up of new children and youths for learn to sail courses has traditionally resulted in an annual "transfusion" of new members to provide the essential manpower and financial injection that the Club needs to be able to survive from year to year.
Whilst some parts of the initial learn to sail could be held close to the Club, the more advanced parts require use of the area that will be blocked or substantially blocked by the project. Furthermore, despite the best efforts to contain any disturbance of the seabed, there will be some "dirtying" of the waters in the areas not blocked off, and moreover a perception, that the Club will be unable to effectively counter, that the waters may be in some way "contaminated". These factors are bound to have a significant impact on the number of new members (mainly children and youths and their families) the Club will be able to attract to its courses and retain existing young members. Families looking at enrolling their children in a sailing course will look and go elsewhere. The Club will not receive the necessary level of "transfusion" of new members and their fees for several years, and that could prove "fatal" to the Club's viability.
In addition, based on my experience of participating in sailing races conducted by NSC over the last 20 years, on the background of my overall sailing experience spanning close to 60 of my 65 years (which includes experience in participating in sailing races in all states of Australia and overseas), I believe the construction process will make it impossible to run proper sailing races for both those graduating from the learn to sail programmes and the more experienced sailors in the Club. The area of Upper Middle Harbour where NSC is able to set sailing course is already quite restricted by the size and topography of the waterway. Effectively cutting off access from any area to the east of the line between Seaforth Bluff and Clive Park will make the setting of a proper course impossible in most of the prevailing wind conditions in the area. The awareness of this will discourage potential new members, and likely impact on many existing members, resulting in them going elsewhere, again drastically and possibly fatally impacting on the viability of the Club which relies on volunteer members and their annual fees to remain viable. I was a Northbridge resident during the past 20 years of my membership there. I moved to Avalon Beach in August 2020, but currently still return to NSC to sail. I certainly will be looking to sail elsewhere once the ability of NSC to conduct meaningful races occurs.
I am not naive enough to expect that submissions in opposition to the project because of its impact on NSC will have a significant impact on the final decision for the project to proceed or not. I, however, cannot see that the proposed project however managed, will not have a devastating impact on the Club I love and have spent countless volunteer hours assisting in supporting it, as well as spending just as many hours enjoying the sailing races it organizes as well as the pleasure of seeing the Club's training programmes successfully introducing many children (including my own) into the wonderful sport of sailing.
Assuming the project goes ahead, I hope there can be some ways in which the government can provide financial and infrastructure support to NSC to enable it to survive both during the construction period and afterwards, so that NSC can continue to provide a facility to support the sport of sailing.

Hello is a 300+ word essay That hopefully should convince you not to build this tunnel for it will kill the vast majority of the environment surrounding the Burnt Bridge Creek.

As an active member and volunteer of the wonderful community run Northbridge Sailing Club (NSC) I am very concerned that the proposed works will destroy the club as Sunday sailing activities will be badly impacted and threaten the future of the club. Luckily there is a solution. Consult with NSC and agree to minimize the impact of maritime restrictions on Sunday sailing activities.

Both my children learnt how to sail at NSC. I am not a sailor myself but I have seen the incredible benefits of dinghy sailing for kids and teens. Both my kids learnt to sail there. It remains passion for both of them. Many of the kids who learnt how to sail have gone on to become world class sailors and some members have represented Australia in the international events including the Olympics and various World Championships.

Being a member of NSC has also taught my kids about giving back to community. Many kids at NSC, including mine, have become volunteer assistant instructors, graduating to instructors, teaching younger kids how to sail . Importantly particularly during these CV-19 times, they have made long-lasting friendships with the cohort they learnt to sail with and seek counsel (away from parents) from the older teens at the club. These support mechanisms have been invaluable.

Sunday sailing also allows for all generations to mix socially and compete - very uncommon in many sporting clubs today. On any given Sunday, you will find all ages sailing and socialising before and after the race- nurturing tolerance and understanding between the generations.

I trust the Government to make sure that these construction works allow for volunteer run clubs, like NSC make an invaluable contribution to community cohesion in our increasingly disconnected society.

Thank you for your consideration of my submission.

I object on the following grounds:
5 years of high impact construction work
Waste dscharge into local creeks
7 suburbs affected
Increased pollution next to a number of schools through unfiltered stacks
Increased traffic
Increased noise
Loss of trees

I am a young professional working for an international company primarily from home. I object to the Beaches Link tunnel project as the information contained in the EIS demonstrates;
- it will not reduce traffic congestion on the northern beaches
- it will expose large numbers of children, residents and workers to unfiltered emissions via stacks and noise, dust contamination and congestion during construction
- it will cause serious and irreparable damage to the natural environment
- it is not aligned with climate change goals that require urgent reductions in emissions
- it is poor value for (public) money.
These shortcomings mean there is no justification for imposing extreme hardship on the communities surrounding the construction sites or for the damage that construction activities will cause.

Congestion - Currently over 50% of workers on the northern beaches do not leave the LGA for work. This rate could permanently increase due to changes in work patterns due to COVID. I have now worked from home for a year and will continue to work from home at least part time as my international role can be managed via Zoom/Teams. Therefore, the much spruiked savings in commuting times are not relevant for many residents. However, what is truly relevant is the forecast INCREASE in local congestion and slower travel times on local road, both during and after construction, as shown in the EIS. TfNSW acknowledges that traffic congestion in Manly Vale and Balgowlah will increase significantly during construction and once the tunnel is built. This mean that for many local residents the tunnel is a lose-lose, any improvement in travel times in the tunnel will be cancelled out by clogged local roads.
In my own case regularly moving between suburbs including Seaforth, where two concurrent construction sites will effectively paralyse traffic, will be increasingly difficult and will negatively impact my daily life. Should the tunnel be built and work in centralised offices resume, I would choose not to use the tunnel. As a young professional living in a city with sky-high housing costs, I would not spend money on a toll road, particularly given the additional cost of parking at the other end. The EIS seems to give no consideration to the impact of a huge increase in traffic coming into the northern beaches, especially on summer weekends. We already have serious parking issues and had major congestion problems this summer – how is the peninsula supposed to cope?

Emissions - The EIS claims only ‘negligible’ increases in emissions from the exhaust stacks, yet the data use to establish background air quality does not come from the immediate site but is measured against a general Sydney level. New air quality modelling must be done that show exactly how every site around the stacks will be impacted. What happened to the recommendations in the State Parliamentary Inquiry into Westconnex (2018) that included ‘the NSW Government install, on all current and future motorway tunnels, filtration systems in order to reduce the level of pollutants emitted’? Unfiltered stack situated near schools, shops, workplaces and homes is unacceptable.

Environmental damage - The loss of almost 2,000 mature trees along Wakehurst Parkway will have a devastating impact on Manly Dam Memorial Park and its rich biodiversity including numerous endangered species. This area was declared only in 2017 to be rich in endangered plant and animal species and worthy of conservation. The damage is likely to be permanent given the widening of the road and the expected runoff into the reserve. Lighting all along the wider Wakehurst Parkway will detrimentally affect both nocturnal and diurnal animals. They will die out from the area, including endangered Pygmy possums. Burnt Bridge Creek and its wonderful riparian corridor four kilometres long, running from Seaforth to Manly Lagoon, will be completely dried up (96% base flow reduction) meaning it will become incapable of supporting tall leafy trees and riparian bushland. The endangered grey headed flying fox and numerous other species will be unable to survive once the creek and water retention dam on the golf course are removed. What other downstream impacts will occur are unclear and should have been investigated as part of the EIS. Again, such massive environmental damage is unacceptable.

Climate change goals – The Beaches Link tunnel is entirely at odds with the stated NSW Government emissions reduction commitment. The project build will generate The construction of the tunnel alone will contribute an additional 1,521,365 t CO2-e to our greenhouse gas emissions. The project will lock the region into a predominantly petrol/diesel private vehicle based transport model, given the absence of policy levers to drive a shift to electric vehicles and the failure to commit to a dedicated public transport lane within the tunnel (see EIS, Appendix X, pg v.). The construction emissions alone are equivalent to 5.4% of annual NSW’s transport emissions – and will achieve only a projected 10% reduction in traffic along Military Rd. As a young person I am acutely aware that today’s leaders are lagging on emissions goals, and so leaving behind a serious problem.

Poor value for money – It is not yet clear what the total bill for the Beaches Link tunnel will be, but perhaps around $10-14 billion? (The cost in terms of environmental, health and congestion impacts, however, are apparent.) This is public money to be spent on a ‘congestion busting’ traffic solution that will alleviate congestion on Sydney’s northern beaches and will, primarily, benefit communities south of Spit Bridge, who will suffer none of the losses of green space or the many years of construction impacts. It is, however, unlikely to be completed even for this huge amount. The experience of West Connex, for example was an increase in cost from $10billion to $16.8 billion and a construction period of eight years, actually took 10 years. Having the tunnel located near the spit doesn’t address the issue of the bottleneck caused from residents travelling from the northern part of the northern beaches. It makes more sense to me to divert the traffic at Dee Why where there are already new roads built near the northern beaches hospital and build an underground tunnel from there. This would have less disruption during construction and also less environmental devastation.

Summing up – These are just some of the many issues that concern me. I reiterate, I would not use the Beaches Link tunnel and I do not believe we need it, especially at such high cost to the community, the environment and the taxpayers.

I am very concerned for the health of middle harbour, my family through recreational and spirting clubs use live park, tanks park, Northbridge sailing club and north bridge baths almost daily and I believe this will be lost sure the dredging.