Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

Overall Objection:
Considering the COVID environment and its impact on immigration and thus population growth, along with the new working from home reality, the whole project should be scrapped.
The "Jobs and Growth" mantra of governments is no longer relative and is not sustainable moving forward.
The impact on sustainablity and hence climate change from the construction of this monstrosity will be immense and unable to be offset by its longer term operation.
Sydney needs to be planned around a sustainable future, not a growth by any means future and this project is not compatable with a sustainable plan.
Large infrastucture projects are a waste of tax payers money, as people now want to and can work from home. The concept of bringing the masses to the CBD to work from 9-5 is an anachranism and no longer credible nor efficient nor healthy.

Local Objection:
The concept of gathering vehichle fumes from all parts of sydney and releasing them at Cammeray is a danger to our health and detrimantal to our environment.
There is no basis for providing easy access for vehicles from the inner west to pass through our community and release their poluting fumes, just so they can get to the beach quickly. If they want to get to the beach quickly they should buy a house there.
This project will have an adverse impact on our property values due to the exhaust stacks and resultant air quality, and will enhance values in the inner west by making access to the beaches easier, which is unfair and unconcionable.
We have already endured vibrations and damage to properties during construction of the City Metro construction tunnelling and any further tunnelling will further impact on propertires in the area.

I strongly object to this ill advised project which further turns Sydney into one big polluting Toll road seemingly only for the benefit of the profiteers.
I object on the grounds of Health & Safety & Biodiversity..
I can’t fathom why any politician would endorse 4 Unfiltered pollution stacks next to schools & homes ..
No business case has been disclosed & the tunnels do Not have a dedicated bus lane as thus would seemingly affect the profits of the tunnel for the operator..
Also High risk to Biodiversity Marine life & Eco Systems Over 3000 trees lost .
The whole project does not add up & viable alternatives have not been considered while other Cities the world over move to a more green sustainable future NSW is doubling down on toll roads built for profit not people .

As a resident of Cammeray and as a parent of a child who attends Anzac Park Public School, I object to the Beaches Link Tunnel given the fact that the minimal benefit doesn't outweigh the negative impact to our environment in terms of added pollution from the stacks that will be constructed less than 300 meters from a Public School where 1000 kids are attending; the irreversible degradation of Sydney Harbour on Middle Cove impacting our local flora and fauna, the loss of green space; the additional local traffic that will be using our local roads as result of restrictions and changes to the flow of local traffic to force the use of the Tunnel. We need infrastructure for Public Transport, not more privately own Toll road tunnels.
If this project goes ahead, my request is that the EIS needs to be reviewed again and amended to address:
Strict control and measures enforceable by the contractors executing the construction for all forms of pollution during construction and after the project is delivered. Pollution including dust, noise, waste management and water pollution.

The cost and environmental impact of the proposed tunnel across Middle Harbour would/will result in more cars and discourage the use of public transport and, I note, there would no longer be a designated bus lane. The northern entrance to the tunnel will create increased pollution levels affecting Balgowlah Boys High School as well as local homes impacted by this major engineering proposal.
The destruction of the little remaining green space, formerly Balgowlah Golf Course, would be the death knell of the wild life it supports including ducks and ducklings as well as destroying the only "green space" left in the local area.
The proposed roadworks for Wakehurst Parkway would have a devastating affect on flora and fauna and the Tunnel Tubes in Middle Harbour will threaten seagrass beds and marine life by contaminated sediment.
Traffic changes will have a major impact, including delays on local roads and intersections including Condamine St at Manly Vale, Balgowlah, Sydney Road and Warringah Road/Wakehurst Parkway and rat-runs will inevitably occur.
The proposal will result in more cars on the roads when commuters should be being encouraged to use public transport and, as noted above, there will no longer be a designated bus lane!
A better solution would be the long overdue rebuilding of the Spit Bridge by raising it height allowing boats to pass under and as well making it six lanes to end the current bottleneck and obviate the need to have peak-hour lane changes.
What happens when all the resulting increased traffic converges on the Harbour Bridge? Lane changes can only go so far.
At a time when environmental issues have become a world-wide issue, it beggars belief that the NSW Government is proposing that MORE, not FEWER, private vehicles be pandered to at the expense of the majority who depend on public transport.
One can only wonder what undisclosed money will go to the Government's coffers from the private contractors.
In all advanced countries, public transport is the accepted, and supported, means of public transport - not private cars.

As a parent from an Anzac Park Public School student, I have serious concerns regarding the site traffic and pollution during construction. If this project goes ahead, we need assurance and an enforceable compliance plan by the contractor to ensure appropriate steps have been taken to protect the school community, in particular:
1. Ensuring dust pollution is completed suppressed.
2. Ensuring no heavy vehicles travel anywhere near the school including Ernest St, Anzac Park Avenue, Rosalind St and M1 Miller Street off ramp during the hours of 7:00 am and 6:00pm on school days.
3. Suppress all construction related noise during school days to ensure teacher and children, including the more vulnerable ones with autism, are not adversely affected by noise whilst they are teaching/learning.

As a North Sydney area resident, I strongly object to this project. If this project goes ahead, it must compensate the loss of green space due the permanent removal of portions of Cammeray Golf Course, Anzac Park and St Leonards Park.

I strongly object to the Beaches Link Tunnel and Gore Hill Freeway Update Project. Details in attached pdf document.

I object to the above proposed project development for all of the following reasons:
1 There is no public business case which substantiates the necessity of this project.
2 Alternatives to satisfy the same objectives have not been adequately explored by the state government.
3 A substantive alternatives analysis has not been completed under SEARS as required.
4 The risk assessment is incomplete.
5 There is no justification of the travel savings described.
6 The benefits are based on future population growth, and furthermore traffic modelling is based on old numbers (2012 and 2016) with no consideration of the effects of the pandemic on traffic patterns.
7 The cost of the project is prohibitive.
8 The negative impact on Middle Harbour and the nearby harbour beaches with the dredging of contaminated soil and removal of same by barge. The PFAS and heavy metals detected in the sludge pose a health risk for residents and users of the waterways.
9 The significant impact on Flat Rock Gully as follows:
a. Contaminated soil being dug up;
b. Negative impact on biodiversity, critical habitat and existing wildlife corridors; and
c. 390 trees destroyed. All of these items require further consideration.
10 Loss of green space in Cammeray, specifically around the Cammeray Golf Course and Flat Rock Gully.
11 The proposed Beaches Link does not resolve any local traffic congestion in Cammeray, North Sydney and other suburbs on the lower north shore. If anything, the project creates a number of failed intersections.
12 The construction and ventilation stacks would create health issues and risks as follows:
a. Airborne contaminants
b. Emissions from the ventilation stacks
c. Dust
d. Significant vehicle emission during construction
e. Removal and transport of contaminated soils
In summary, I object to the project as the benefits have not been clearly demonstrated and the alternatives have not been adequately explored. In addition, the significant impact on the environment and the risks created by construction and the infrastructure itself have not been adequately dealt with in the proposal.

Section 3.1 of the EIS states:
The population of
"Greater Sydney is forecast to grow from five million to eight million people over the next 40 years" this statement is not referenced but appears to be from "Directions for a Greater Sydney 2017-2056 (Greater Sydney Commission, 2017)" This population growth forecast is outdated as it is prior to the effects of Covid-19 and should be revisited. In addition the growth targets are as a result of political decisions that have seen Australia's immigration rate rise from modest levels in the early 2000's to be the highest in the OECD.

The above factors highlight the risk in adopting population growth forecasts that are both politically motivated and pre-covid. I suggest factoring should be applied to the modelling so that a lower population growth rate is assumed.

Section 4.3.5 is well written and in particular, builds a solid case for not planning a rail line to the Northern Beaches.

hi-I am a 13 yr old boy. I have grown up in this area all my life. I live not far from Burnt Bridge Creek. I love the Creek, all the trees and animals there. I have just found out if you build the tunnel, the Burnt Bridge Creek will loose 96% of its water, that means the creek will die, that means the trees will die, that means the animals will die. I don't want that to happen. I love all the nature around me. I also found out that you want to build huge ventilation stacks -so that polluted air can spread around 1200 mts. Do you realize that not only me, but lots of kids will breathe this polluted air and lots of kids are asthmatic-like me. This will make even healthy kids sick, but for us asthmatics, make us even sicker. We would go to hospital more often and some of us could die. Please dont build this tunnel-we dont even need it. We just need a good bus system, better than what we have. PLEASE DONT BUILD THE TUNNEL

Having lived in this area for over half a century, I have watched in dismay the gradual destruction of the environment in the name of "progress". Hopes have constantly been dashed when measures to protect our sensitive environment are ignored for perceived financial gain. Already compromised by the housing proliferation, Burnt Bridge Creek is a shadow of its former self. Water holes have been obliterated , confined to concrete pipes under roads, habitat of the natural fauna & flora destroyed . The little that remains of this once pristine waterway is ecologically & hydrologically important as pointed out in the environmental impact studies already carried out. We have the ability to protect it for future generations before it is lost forever. This is the last chance to preserve this natural asset and I urge you to have a long term approach to finding a solution that doesn't result in its destruction.

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage

Clive Park Aboriginal Site – Jacobs report states the sites could be subject to indirect impacts associated with vibration and settlement. Clive Park contains some significant sites which are important to protect.

Recommendation:
1. The large cave/ midden site and rock overhang 45-6-0654 need constant monitoring via engineering audits to ensure no rock fall on people who visit the cave and adjacent foreshore or who sit on the top of the overhang which is a popular park destination for its water views. If there is any sign of instability, people should be restricted from entering the area.

2. Funds should be set aside as part of the conditions of consent for maintenance and repair for any damage caused by the development as a precautionary measure as well as who is responsible for implementation. This should be determined in consultation with relevant stakeholders eg Aboriginal Heritage Office, NSW Gov authorities, local government and most importantly Aboriginal custodians.



Ecology

Recommendation:
All suitable felled trees with hollows, particularly those larger than 20cm should be relocated to nearby areas so they can continue to provide habitat for birds and arboreal mammals

If that is not feasible, then funds should be set aside for new artificial hollows to be made in suitable dead trees nearby or habitat boxes installed (which require long term maintenance that would need to be allocated for, along with who is responsible for long term maintenance)

Support permanent fauna connectivity measures and maintenance considerations for underpasses and rope crossings as per p. 244 of Appendix 5 Biodiversity Development Assessment Report by Arcadis. Must ensure in the conditions of consent that enough resources are allocated to implementation and ongoing maintenance and monitoring and who will be responsible. Consider that RMS may not undertake their responsibilities in the long term if they are not audited – so who will audit and implement in the short and long term?


Endangered Ecological Communities (TECs)

Recommendation:
Consider soil translocation of felled Duffeys Forest or other communities so long as Phytophthora is considered. If Phytophthora already exists at the possible host location, then translocation may be possible. Suitable host sites would need to be determined by Northern Beaches Council and NPWS


Water Quality Creeks

Recommendation: Consider as part of conditions of consent that funds are set aside to install permanent water quality improvement devices that capture rubbish and improve water quality with sediment and nutrient management. The suitable infrastructure should be determined in consultation with Sydney Water and the relevant local council as a kind of offset.

Water table draw down

Very concerned that moderate to high potential for ground water dependant ecosystems at Flat Rock Creek and Coastal Upland Swamp TEC have the potential to be impacted by water table draw down over the long term. Also very concerned that this EIS will be assessed with the acknowledgement that impacts are not known (p. 238 and 244 Appendix 5 Biodiversity Development Assessment Report by Arcadis).

Recommendation:
The potential areas impacted by drawdown need to be mapped and appropriate offsets included based on worst case scenario as a precautionary principle in the conditions of consent, particularly in relation to riparian areas and TECs. Figure 7-1 map b and e should identify potential indirect impact areas from drawdown requiring biodiversity offsets.

Recommendation:
The conditions of consent also need to ensure monitoring in the long term – for a minimum of 50 years along with appropriate funds to undertake that work and allocation of responsibilities. If you leave it with RMS, they will forget and no one will audit them to ensure it is being done. Best to give the funds to local government as an independent auditor.

Recommendation:
Support tunnel linings to minimise water table drawdown and any other best practice measures.


Replacement Trees / Bush regeneration

Recommendation: Ensure the conditions of consent allocate for replacement trees dying within a 5 year period and the need for an audit and replanting. Local government needs to be allocated enough funds to ensure maintenance and management of replacement vegetation on land under their responsibility for a minimum of 10 years and for drawdown impacts for a minimum of 50 years.

The proposal initially sounded positive to improve transport options to and from the area. However there are serious environmental issues that need to be resolved before the project is further approved. In principle, I object to:

1. the degradation of Balgowlah Golf Course and Burnt Bridge Creek - there will be a total loss of habitats for the entire construction period and possibly forever, in the case of the Creek and wildlife habitats and large trees which take decades to grow.
2. The size of an unfiltered exhaust tower - this proposal is reckless, exposing toxic fumes and residues to local residents that will affect their health and wellbeing, and will be an 8 storey high eye sore landmark.
3. The impact of 6 years (minimum) on local residents with construction chaos, noise, dust, extra traffic, heavy trucks moving in and through the local area. How unbearable for local residents! Further there is expected rat running of local residents trying to avoid construction and traffic delays. Local roads in these areas are already congested, dangerously so, at certain times of the day.
4. The amplification of Wakehurst Parkway will further degrade the environment in Garigal National Park and the Manly Dam area. It will also feed to areas that will not cope with traffic bottlenecks.
5. The goal of cutting traffic in Military Road will only improve traffic for an estimated 2 years.
6. Huge growth in visitor numbers are anticipated with the Tunnel's completion. Many of the northern beaches amenities will simply not cope with the influx, most notably being inadequate parking.

The Beaches Tunnel is therefore an inadequate solution to justify spending 10 billion dollars to cause immense local noise, dust, toxic outputs, traffic snarls, loss of local habitats and trees, as well as the loss of the enjoyment of the golf course, parks and amenities, and even local resident's homes. It threatens the health and wellbeing of those who live or work in the vicinity, exposing them to toxic fumes and hazards. It will be an eyesore, both during construction and thereafter. These issues need to be fully addressed before the Beaches Tunnel is further approved.

Hi, my name is Bezi and I am 16 years old.
I started sailing at Northbridge Sailing Club in 2012 when I was 7 years old, and over time, this has impacted who I am today greatly. Being able to go down to the club everyday and go out on the beautiful middle harbour founded my love for sailing, which I now compete in at a State and National level, representing Northbridge Sailing Club.
I am also employed by the club, where I work as a sailing coach.
I also volunteer to teach the learn to sail program, spreading my love of sailing to all.
Not only this, but being at the club around the community there and being able to spread the love of sailing is something that impacts my mental health in such a positive way.
The Beaches Link tunnel will affect this greatly.
Now I know better than anyone how useful this tunnel will be, as I live in Castlecrag but attend school at Manly Selective - in North Curl Curl. This tunnel will affect me positively every day and hopefully change my 2 hour + commute every day JUST to go to school.
But I am also not stupid, and I know that the effects of the tunnel will be detrimental for Northbridge Sailing Club.
If you go sailing in middle harbour, chances are the wind will blow from an easterly direction (it's called a seabreeze) A typical sailing course involves an upwind and a downwind, and a wide harbour is needed to do so, because boats 'tack' across the harbour. The only feasible place to put this course is from the pontoon of the sailing club up about halfway up the harbour (east) towards Mosman. However, in your proposed plan there will the cofferdams and exclusion zones there?? So how will this be possible?? The harbour will also not look as pretty with barges and cofferdams, and this will drive away people from joining the sailing club and therefore I will eventually be put out of work for my job at the sailing club. Not only this, but without a learn to sail program, I will lose my meaningful connections with my friends at Northbridge Sailing Club, therefore possibly losing my love of sailing.
Please, please, please don't let this happen. I need Northbridge Sailing Club to stay alive.
I urge 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.
All I want to do is be able to keep sailing, and keep my job. Please make this possible. I beg you.

Cities all over the world are improving their public transport infrastructure, not building massive road tunnels for private cars. To combat conjested roads the government should be encouraging working from home and improving public transport. Please stop this backwards thinking and plan more carefully for Sydney's future.

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.

Hi there,

I would like to object to spending this public money given the radical economic, social and community upheaval caused by COVID. We need to reset on work from home statistics, transport requirements, workforce planning. I do object to the overall concept in any case given the pollution, environmental impacts and the band aid approach which does not consider infrastructure to support the movement of NEW people in and out of the area because of transport flow changes. Thank you for stopping this project in advance. Kind regards Kellie Wade 0427 251 592

As much as I support progress, I believe that this project will have long-term catastrophic impact on the local environment and community. What I'm highlighting here is likely similar to what many thousands will be saying:
- the economic and "time-saving" calculations (saving 30+ mins to the city, when it only takes 35mins now) are based on old, misinformed and inaccurate factors ... the forecasts were made in 2016, prior to the B-Line service introduction, growth in work from home and introduction on the Northern Beaches hospital. The quote in the documentation that, 2016 being the baseline year and there will be little material difference between 2016 and 2020 is incorrect - private traffic is still only 90% of levels of 2019, public transport is down 50%. Thus the fundamental business case justification is already incorrect, ill-conceived and will NEVER achieve its stated outcome.
- the community consultation has been sporadic at best. It is clear that any community submissions/concerns have not been considered or acted on. ONLY 184 out of 2427 submissions supported the proposal, but it is clear that zero community-focused adjustments were made.
- Emissions: for me the most fundamental reason for objecting to this project. The planned high emission/unfiltered exhaust stacks (double World Health emission standards) are to be built right next to sports grounds and public schools: "In the view of the medical experts (through the NSW Chief Medical Officer and the technical experts on air flow from ventilation stacks) there will definitely be an increase in the level of air toxins in the atmosphere close to the stacks (1.2 km and below), but the “modelling” tells the experts that not enough people will die as a result of the increase in air toxins to justify the expenditure on filtration to justify the additional expense on installing filtration in order to reduce those additional deaths" - in simple terms, the value of people's lives falls below the cost of adding filters to these stacks!!! According to health experts, there is no safe level of exposure, yet the EIS says it is safe.
- there is a lack of implementable controls relating to environmental, construction noise and contractor breaches (see the inquiry into WestConnex construction breaches). One component that stands out is the construction hours being at the "discretion of the contractor". This is a delegation of responsibility by the authorities to the mental, physical and health detriment of the residents. Who will be responsible for the health litigation associated with this poorly planned construction project?
It is clear the impact on residents and rate-payers' lives are inconsequential to the bigger picture, which is unfortunate, as it is our children and their children who will end up carrying the polluted burden of this project.

Mitigation of the air and noise pollution from the construction of the tunnel and the air pollution from not filtering the ventilation stacks have not been adequately addressed. I find the blatant disregard for the health and wellbeing of residents and schoolchildren, and the arrogant dismissal of concerns expressed by impacted residents like myself, to be negligent and offensive. Where I live, where I send my children to primary school (St Cecilia's) and where I was intending to send them to high school (Balgowlah Boys) are all directly impacted as a result of this tunnel being pushed through, all without a solid business case. If doing it properly by filtering emissions means it doesn't stack up, then it shouldn't be built.

I provide the following comments in my capacity as a private citizen.

I object to the adequacy of the EIS because the threats to significant local threatened species have been overlooked. The large-footed myotis is not mentioned in the Biodiversity summary and is only mentioned in brief as a possible species for the area in Chapter `19.

The large-footed Myotis is a threatened species of bat that is highly specialised for foraging over waterways. It is known to forage over water within Middle Harbour and a highly significant maternity roost has also been identified near Berry Bay, North Sydney. Details of the ecology of this species have been published in the scientific literature and should have been considered in the EIS. This publication and its findings appear to have been ignored by the EIS.

Gonsalves, L. and Law, B. (2017) Distribution and key foraging habitat of the Large-footed Myotis Myotis macropus in the highly modified Port Jackson estuary, Sydney, Australia: An overlooked, but vulnerable bat. Australian Zoologist, 38, 629-642. doi: 10.7882/AZ.2017.012.

Given that the species flies and it feeds on invertebrates and small fish from the surface of the water, it is likely to access areas of disturbed sediment that are proposed to be contained within the water column by silt curtains, tough surface water in such areas presumably remain exposed and could be accessed by the large-footed myotis. Additional research has identified that the species is vulnerable to the effects of water pollution.

Clarke-Wood, B., Jenkins, K.M., LAW, B.S., Blakey, R.V. (2016) The ecological response of insectivorous bats to coastal lagoon degradation. Biological Conservation 202, 10-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.08.014.

The EIS states that the species, if present, would not be affected because it can forage elsewhere in the harbour, but if contaminated sediments are exposed it may still forage in the area and be exposed to the detrimental effects of pollution. This could happen over any period of brief exposure. This likely scenario has not been considered by the EIS despite the known presence of the species along Middle Harbour, and published findings confirming this and its vulnerability to pollution.

Such obvious oversights call into question the robustness of the EIS and biodiversity assessments more broadly.

In addition, there are known roosts of the threatened Eastern Bent-wing Bat in storm water drains near Primrose Park and again this was not identified in the EIS. Roosts of this species are sensitive to disturbance and it is a major concern that the EIS has not identified this as a potential issue for the project. Details about some of these roosts have also been published in the literature (see below), so this omission is again a major concern about the adequacy of the EIS for biodiversity.

Gonsalves L., Law B. (2017) Seasonal activity patterns of bats in North Sydney, New South Wales: implications for urban bat monitoring programs. Australian Mammalogy 40: 220-29.