Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Connection

I object to this project on the grounds of the fact that the government should be focusing on train travel rather than cars. Spending 8 years and billions of dollars and mass distribution and destruction of trees and parkland is just crazy.

For environmental reasons I do not support this project, and neither do I believe the benefits outweigh the costs. My concerns are these:
1) Schools and homes will be subjected to smoke stacks from the tunnel forever
2) The years of disruption (5-10) to homes in the area places a big burden on local residents
3) The damage to the Harbour foreshore marine life will be long lasting. Will Northbridge Baths ever be safe to swim in again after all the dredging?
4) What are the environmental consequences of digging up Flat Rock, which we know is an old dump site? The release of toxic gases?
5) Are there any potential losses to important Aboriginal sacred sites?

I fully support Gladys but I do not support this project.

I have attached my objections in the document below. PLEASE RECONSIDER THIS TERRIBLE WASTE OF MONEY!!!

I object to the dredging of the seabed at middle harbour. I swim regularly at Northbridge baths and the dredging of the seabed will contaminate the water making it unsafe for swimming. I object to the number of truck movements required to facilitate this project which will block already congested roads and cause increase in travel times to and from Northbridge. I object to the destruction of native habitat and loss of biodiversity at Flat Rock Creek.

I object to the completion of this project as follows:

Biodiversity impacts on Burnt Bridge Creek Area
• I am highly concerned with the overall loss of Green space and a vital ecological corridor. The EIS states that Burnt Bridge Creek is a vital ecological corridor providing a range of important habitats for a diversity of local flora and fauna”. Yet despite this acknowledgement, it is predicted that natural water flow will reduce by up to 79% during the construction phase. This will not only have a devastating effect on local trees & wildlife but will also impact Manly/Queenscliff Lagoon & Beach which will suffer from significant increases in wastewater discharge from the Creek.
• The construction site is within 120 metres of the threatened Grey Headed Flying Fox Colony that will suffer disturbance from construction noise, destruction of a large number of trees (many of which they feed on a nightly basis) and access to clean water.
• Alarmingly the EIS does not acknowledge the existence of a local echidna population in the area – this is a major concern. A primary threat to echidnas is habitat loss, especially the loss of fallen logs, tree stumps, and protective understorey vegetation. As they move slowly they are also vulnerable to being hit by vehicles. Therefore any project of this scale must include plans to manage this vulnerable and protected species. I recently documented the existence of two echidna foraging along the bike trail to the south of the Flying Fox colony (January 2021). As it stands, the EIS makes no acknowledgment they exist at the site, therefore management of this species is not included in the relevant Biodiversity chapter to protect this population along Burnt Bridge Creek, nor to check burrows/nests for small offspring prior to and during the construction phase and once the project is completed, keeping them safe from moving vehicles.

Biodiversity Impacts – Seaforth and Manly Dam
• Loss of Trees, native Vegetation, insufficient replanting: This area covers a section of the Duffys Forest Ecological Community, with many endangered plant species and native bushland that sadly is near extinct due to land clearing and development. Removal of some 1979 mature trees in Garigal National Park, Bantry Bay and Manly Dam area will only be replaced through the planting of some 300 sapling trees.
• Water Quality Manly Dam Catchment Zone: There is significant risk of run off to creeks, riparian zones that flow to Manly Dam and Manly Lagoon during the construction phase.
• Significant disruption & displacement of Native Fauna: The EIS notes a high number of native and threatened species in the area, and that many will desert the area due to vibration and noise. This does not take into account less mobile fauna that (depending on the time of the year) have offspring in their nests/burrows and will be left to face destruction of their habitat.
• Overall environmental impacts not considered for all projects planned in this region. The long term & often incremental environmental impacts along this section of this freeway have not been considered in association with the high rise housing redevelopment around Frenchs Forest that is being planned as a result of this project. Environmental & biodiversity impacts should be addressed from an area/regional perspective rather than an individual project perspective.

Traffic/Transport Impacts – Beaches Link

• The EIS relies on outdated traffic volumes (2016 data) and has not taken into account census data that indicates the majority of car trips on the Northern Beaches originate Dee Why and north nor impacts of COVID 19.
• Whilst the EIS considers impacts to very local intersections around Balgowlah, it does not appear to consider the regular traffic jams at major intersections at Condamine St/Pittwater Road in Manly Vale; Brookvale/Dee Why (Warringah Road, Pittwater Road – a known blackspot) and the intersection at Warringah Road/Frenchs Forest near the hospital. Unintended consequences from the tunnel build need to be addressed, particularly around incremental changes in local traffic areas to mitigate traffic issues around the construction site.
• The Tunnel Design prioritises the use of private cars and does not provide access for a dedicated bus lanes/staging areas or consider the increase in public transport patronage with the associated planned increase in population density along the Northern Beaches.

Human Health/Noise/Pollution Impacts.
• All concerns raised by the community regarding negative impacts related to noise, human health, pollution and traffic congestion are evident in the EIS.
The mitigation processes, strategies and solutions are very light on detail and give no agency to residents living within the 4 zones of the construction phase to address these negative impacts as they arise.
• This project will deliver immediate & extremely negative outcomes for all residents in terms of noise, pollution and health impacts within a 1-2km radius of both tunnel exits/entrances and more broadly negative outcomes in terms of traffic jams/overdevelopment across the Northern Beaches.
• NO details on the actual Mitigation triggers or solutions to address Medium to high risk in Human Health Impacts to Local Residents during construction phase. EIS states that Zone 4 will experience Medium risk of dust settlement, human health and ecological impacts as a result of demolition activities and high risk related to as a result of earthworks, construction and track-out activities. Whilst EIS states there are standard mitigation strategies to manage dust impacts by project workers; there are no details on the actual process around communicating to residents on how they can mitigate and minimise dust settlement impacts on their homes, schools and day care centres. Will warnings be issued, or work stopped at a certain wind speed or direction for example?

Bay Precinct objects because the construction of the Dive Site in Flat Rock Creek Gully necessitates the destruction of 390 mature trees.

To whom it may concern,

I am greatly concerned with the diverting of the waterway in flat rock gully. This will have extremely negative impact on the environment.
I am also disappointed with what is happening with flat rock gully fir this project. So many people use this area for recreation.
I would like a plan put forward before the commencement of this project of how the area will be regenerated post the project completion. I would not like a new playing field. I would like it to go back to trees and walking paths, maybe a new playground.
I am concerned about pollution of middle harbour. There are so many mammals - seals, whales etc that will forced to move. I am also concerned for the health of my family and the local community regarding water pollution at northbridge baths in which hundreds of people swim in each week.
This project is an unnecessary and unwelcome project to everyone I have spoken to in this area. It will not positively impact us at all, all of the effects will be negative. To top this all off the road is not even fir public transport but for cars. Which is an absolute waste of effort. We should be encouraging and improving our public transport in this city.

Kind regards
Greta

I object because (1) there is no business case justifying this enormous expense to NSW residents; and (2) vehicle traffic is being encouraged without investigation of alternate public transport solutions.

I am a resident of the Northern Beaches and have only recently become aware of the major impact the planned Beaches Link Tunnel is going to have on us. I am making a submission, because I am strongly opposed to this development.
It is going to have long lasting detrimental effects on the environment, the way of life on the Northern Beaches, to everyone in the area's health and these things seem to be under reported in the EIS.
I am opposed to the destruction of native bush land and the removal of thousands of trees, the removal of recreational areas which are very highly utilized in this area, the harmful effects this development is going to have on sensitive species that live around here and the destruction of aboriginal rock art.
It seems be to a very big spend on something that isn't going to be as beneficial to anyone as is being reported. $12 billion can surely be spent much more beneficially somewhere else where there is a real need. It also appears that the numbers used to justify this tunnel is based on data from 2017, not taking into account the big shift that has taken place due to COVID. Many more people are working from home and don't need to commute into the city anymore and this is surely going to be the way of the future. Shouldn't we be spending more on upgrading and bettering the public transport system instead of putting more cars on the road?
I am strongly opposed to having thousands of trucks and equipment brought into the area to be used during the 5-7 years of construction. It is going to cause major traffic chaos and endanger people living in the area. Not even talking about the extra traffic the tunnel is going to bring to the Northern Beaches once it is finished. There just isn't the infrastructure to be able to handle this.
I would like to know what is going to be done about the stacks that are going to be pumping unfiltered exhaust fumes into the air, polluting a large area of the Northern Beaches? How will the endangered species and aboriginal rock art and native bushland be protected? What is going to be done about the traffic chaos if or when the tunnel is being constructed? How is the traffic in the local area going to be managed when the tunnel is built? Why are public transport alternatives not being thoroughly explored?
And I would like to reiterate that I am strongly opposed to the building of this tunnel, it seems that the negatives far outway the positives.

I object to the Beaches Link tunnel. I have tried to keep an open mind about it but to me the negatives far outweigh the positives.
I live in North Balgowlah and my main concerns are:
(a) the years of noise and vibration during the construction period, which will surely take a toll on people's mental health, particularly when so many people are now working from home;
(b) the decrease in air quality as a result of my suburb being located between two of the ventilation stacks;
(c) the incredibly significant impact that the construction and operation of the tunnel will have on Manly Dam and Bantry Bay - the substantial destruction of natural flora and fauna, and pollution of waterways such that they can't be enjoyed by wildlife or the public without risk of harm; and
(d) my suburb being a potential rat run following construction of the tunnel.
It seems like North Balgowlah will be one of the most adversely impacted areas, but not actually receive any benefit with no nearby access to the tunnel entrances.
I am also concerned that the modelling for the tunnel was done prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. From personal experience, people are working from home a lot more, and I think modelling should be done on the basis of the projected work habits of the northern beaches population.
The tunnel seems very short sighted when we should be focusing on more efficient forms of transport which are better for the environment, such as a train or monorail, or an improved bus infrastructure.

I oppose the Beaches link tunnel project until such time as:
The business case is released for public consideration;
The need for the project, and its superiority over public transport alternatives has been demonstrated by way of a transparent process involving informed public engagement and consultation, noting that the EIS process has to date failed to evaluate the relative merits of public transport alternatives;
Comprehensive fulsome remediation of all contamination of Flat Rock Gully including removal and / or treatment of historic landfill, chemical & other unknown disposals [p26 Ch16 EIS, p34 Ch16 EIS, p42 Ch16 EIS, p43 Ch16 EIS, p46 Appendix N EIS] is made a deliverable of the Beaches Link project;
Proper implementation of enduring lining & containment structures of contamination of the Willoughby Leisure Centre and Bicentennial oval sites are made a deliverable of the Beaches Link project (p43 Ch16 EIS, p53 Ch16 EIS, );
A landfill gas study in compliance with Hazardous Ground Gas Guidelines for construction and operation of tunnel (p35 Ch16 EIS, p78 Ch16 EIS) is conducted prior to addressing removal of landfill contaminant at Flat Rock Gully, Willoughby Leisure Centre and Bicentennial oval;
Detailed investigations are carried out to confirm the presence and extent of potentially odorous landfill waste material and landfill gases within the project site at Flat Rock Gully;
Mitigation plans be devised and implemented should odorous materials and / or landfill gases be exposed during removal of Flat Rock Gully during construction;
It is agreed contaminated spoil not to be stored or retained onsite at Flat Rock Gully, Willoughby Leisure centre or Bicentennial oval;
Community is consulted if refined predictions of groundwater levels and drawdown indicate that impacts would be greater than the impacts presented in the environmental impact statement prior to mitigation measures been incorporated into the detailed design and implemented in construction (p74 Ch16 EIS);
The Tunnel design is amended to reduce draw down at groundwater dependent ecosystems and sensitive environment at Flat Rock Gully (Project only 2028 up to 4M p60 Ch16 EIS, Project only 2128 up to 11M p67 Ch16 EIS);
The Tunnel design is amended to reduce draw down at areas of environmental interest for contamination at Flat Rock Gully (Project only 2028 up to 21M p58 Ch16 EIS, Project only 2128 Willoughby Leisure Centre up to 27M p66);
The Tunnel design is amended to reduce ground water predicted draw down of 28 M / 36 M at Northbridge after 100 years of operation with / without extra tunnel lining installed (2128 up to 36M p62 Ch16 EIS);
The immersed tube tunnel design is re-considered and / or the dredging plan is changed to ensure highly contaminated Middle Harbour sea bed sediment (p26 ch16 EIS) which is to be disturbed and / or removed ( p52 Ch16 EIS) is treated & carefully disposed at appropriately licenced & geographically suitable onshore facilities;
The Flat Rock Gully dive site design is amended to avoid the need to remove any trees;
The Flat Rock Gully dive site design is assessed and amended as necessary so that the wildlife corridor is assured during and upon project completion;
The Flat Rock Gully dive site is restored to native bushland in a superior state than at project commencement;
The community is transparently consulted around the number, type, positioning, ongoing operation & alert reporting from air, soil, surface water, ground water & harbour water monitoring stations within the project boundaries (p73 ch16 EIS);
Data collected from agreed air, soil, surface water, ground water & harbour monitoring stations are made available through an easily accessible public web portal within a day of data collection;
Real time/ Alert style air quality monitors installed at Bicentennial Reserve & Willoughby Leisure Centre netball courts to keep people participating in sports activities safe;
Real time / Alert style water quality monitors at Northbridge baths, Clive park and Northbridge sailing club to keep recreational water users safe (p52 Ch16 EIS);
Breaches / exceedances of accepted guideline & community agreed air, soil, surface water, ground water & harbour benchmark measures are made public, promptly investigated and appropriate mitigation action taken to address the underlying root cause;
A full assessment of biodiversity (not limited to threatened species) in and around Flat Rock Gully, Middle Harbour and nearby bushland is carried out & findings shared with the community;
A full suite of mitigation measures to protect all the wildlife in local bushland from adverse impacts such as noise, light, traffic, changes in quality and extent of surface & ground water in Flat Rock Gully during construction & remediation of Flat Rock Gully upon project completion;
The Beaches Link project delivers and enacts a long term ecological vision & management plan to restore Flat Rock Gully, Tunks Park and Middle Harbour to fulsome and pristine natural condition as they were prior 1860;
Local assessment is done of current air particulate matter levels (baseline);
Modelling is completed predicting levels of air particulate matter/other air pollutants in the environment using filtered stacks;
Filtering of the pollution stack at Cammeray is re-assessed once the baseline measurements and modelling of predicted levels of particulate matter are completed and compared against Australian standard safe health guideline limits;
Acoustic wall be considered at Flat Rock Gully to mitigate the noise to nearby residents from predicted 560 truck movements per hour, particularly as they use air brakes coming down the long flat rock drive hill to the excavation site and for fully laden trucks accelerating up away from the dive site;
Properties above & in proximity to the tunnel route offered a free pre-construction property condition survey providing a clear record of a property’s condition before work starts. Any damage sustained (including “slight” movement of 10-50mm p29 ch16) during construction (tunnelling, vibration, accidents, ground water movement) or operation (due to draw down) of the Beaches link project will be promptly addressed to the satisfaction and at no cost to the property owner;
The tunnel design is changed to incorporate a dedicated public transport corridor;
Toll costing is made public;
The entire project is certified carbon neutral during construction and operation.

sincerely,
Rudy Gyzen

I object to this project for a number of reasons
1. Unfiltered exhaust stacks - There is irrefutable proof that pollution from cars causes serious health risks. There is evidence captured globally that proves the levels of airborne toxins from other similar tunnel projects greatly exceed recommended health levels. Globally, tunnels that are over 5kms all have filtered exhaust stacks including Japan and Norway who have the most experience of tunnel design and development. The Balgowlah unfiltered smoke stack is within less than 500mtrs to a number of schools and day care centers including Balgowlah Boys (not included as a community receptor for modelling, despite being within 300m and overlooking the exhaust stack), Seaforth Public, St Cecilias, North Balgowlah Public, Punchinello Kindergarten and others. The Balgowlah exhaust stack is particularly problematic as it is located at a low point in the valley, meaning exhaust emissions will be distributed over homes and schools on the hills around it. This includes the tall apartments at Stockland Balgowlah, homes in Ellery Pde Seaforth, Woodbine St North Balgowlah, Maretimo St Balgowlah and everyone in between. Not only will thousands of residents be exposed to increased pollution levels, they will have a daily visual reminder of that fact.
2. Environmental concerns - Burnt Bridge Creek will be severely impacted, removal of Balgowlah Golf Course, Manly Dam impact on flora and fauna, dredging of middle harbour and release of toxins into the harbour which the EIS report has identified and will travel to nearby recreation spots such as Clontarf reserve.
3. 7 years of construction - The Balgowlah golf course and Kirkwood St, Seaforth will be the construction site. From the EIS report there will be over 3000 vehicles entering and exiting every day of construction, which equates to 1 large truck every minute. This comes with heavy diesel exhaust, as well as trucks idling and creating queues to get in and out of the site. The main intersection around the site which is already extremely busy will suffer even longer and heavy delays. The sites will also host a large number of workers; hundreds of people will arrive in the early hours and need parking for their own vehicles, potentially on local streets and residents have no authority to stop them.
4. Impacts of tunnelling - The EIS states they have assessed that 853 properties in Seaforth / Clontarf will experience noise from tunnelling, and 325 properties in Seaforth/Clontarf will experience vibrations. Residents on similar tunnelling projects in Sydney have experienced this. At a site in Carrington St, North Strathfield, many residents suffered severe cracking in their homes from tunnelling 40 metres below them, and had difficulties ensuring contractors and the government accepted responsibility for extensive repairs.
5. Rat-runs - Changes to traffic patterns as a result of the Beaches Link tunnel are projected to significantly increase delays on local roads and intersections including Condamine St at Manly Vale / Balgowlah, Sydney Rd and Warringah Rd / Wakehurst Parkway, despite recent road upgrades. These delays will encourage rat-runs on smaller local streets, increasing travel times and making local streets more dangerous.
6. Toll Operators - The project once complete will be sold to a toll operator such as Transurban at a price that will be significantly less than the cost price. Toll operators profit on inducing more traffic into their assets to maximise traffic.
I strongly object to this proposal and do not believe that other viable transport solutions have been thoroughly investigated. I strongly urge for this project to be delayed until other less disruptive viable solutions are properly investigated. I also believe that these tunnels are being built simply to on sell to a toll operator at a loss and will only encourage more traffic on the roads. Sydney will end up becoming a mini Los Angeles!

I object to this project for a number of reasons
1. Unfiltered exhaust stacks - There is irrefutable proof that pollution from cars causes serious health risks. There is evidence captured globally that proves the levels of airborne toxins from other similar tunnel projects greatly exceed recommended health levels. Globally, tunnels that are over 5kms all have filtered exhaust stacks including Japan and Norway who have the most experience of tunnel design and development. The Balgowlah unfiltered smoke stack is within less than 500mtrs to a number of schools and day care centers including Balgowlah Boys (not included as a community receptor for modelling, despite being within 300m and overlooking the exhaust stack), Seaforth Public, St Cecilias, North Balgowlah Public, Punchinello Kindergarten and others. The Balgowlah exhaust stack is particularly problematic as it is located at a low point in the valley, meaning exhaust emissions will be distributed over homes and schools on the hills around it. This includes the tall apartments at Stockland Balgowlah, homes in Ellery Pde Seaforth, Woodbine St North Balgowlah, Maretimo St Balgowlah and everyone in between. Not only will thousands of residents be exposed to increased pollution levels, they will have a daily visual reminder of that fact.
2. Environmental concerns - Burnt Bridge Creek will be severely impacted, removal of Balgowlah Golf Course, Manly Dam impact on flora and fauna, dredging of middle harbour and release of toxins into the harbour which the EIS report has identified and will travel to nearby recreation spots such as Clontarf reserve.
3. 7 years of construction - The Balgowlah golf course and Kirkwood St, Seaforth will be the construction site. From the EIS report there will be over 3000 vehicles entering and exiting every day of construction, which equates to 1 large truck every minute. This comes with heavy diesel exhaust, as well as trucks idling and creating queues to get in and out of the site. The main intersection around the site which is already extremely busy will suffer even longer and heavy delays. The sites will also host a large number of workers; hundreds of people will arrive in the early hours and need parking for their own vehicles, potentially on local streets and residents have no authority to stop them.
4. Impacts of tunnelling - The EIS states they have assessed that 853 properties in Seaforth / Clontarf will experience noise from tunnelling, and 325 properties in Seaforth/Clontarf will experience vibrations. Residents on similar tunnelling projects in Sydney have experienced this. At a site in Carrington St, North Strathfield, many residents suffered severe cracking in their homes from tunnelling 40 metres below them, and had difficulties ensuring contractors and the government accepted responsibility for extensive repairs.
5. Rat-runs - Changes to traffic patterns as a result of the Beaches Link tunnel are projected to significantly increase delays on local roads and intersections including Condamine St at Manly Vale / Balgowlah, Sydney Rd and Warringah Rd / Wakehurst Parkway, despite recent road upgrades. These delays will encourage rat-runs on smaller local streets, increasing travel times and making local streets more dangerous.
6. Toll Operators - The project once complete will be sold to a toll operator such as Transurban at a price that will be significantly less than the cost price. Toll operators profit on inducing more traffic into their assets to maximise traffic.
I strongly object to this proposal and do not believe that other viable transport solutions have been thoroughly investigated. I strongly urge for this project to be delayed until other less disruptive viable solutions are properly investigated. I also believe that these tunnels are being built simply to on sell to a toll operator at a loss and will only encourage more traffic on the roads. Sydney will end up becoming a mini Los Angeles!

Objection: Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Upgrade – SSI_8862

I write to express my objection to the Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Project. I have done my best to read the extensive EIS documents at this very difficult time. I have significant concerns about the justification for this project particularly given that there is no published business case, it is not high on Infrastructure Australia’s priority list, the EIS demonstrates a significant risk to health and safety and the project and an alternative public transport option has not been fully scoped and compared.

I object to the project for the following reasons:

1. The timing of release of this project at the end of what has been a very challenging year. This project impacts a large number of schools and passes through highly residential areas. Families, community groups and schools have been under a huge amount of strain throughout the exhibition stage. School P&C’s did not have the opportunity to review the documents and parents were caring for children on school holidays. The project should be re-exhibited well after the COVID-19 crisis has passed and when normal life returns and when we understand the permanent changes that it has made.

2. I object to the project due to the contamination risks it presents to the environment and to human health and the negative impact on our precious waterways and green spaces. Flat Rock Gully is a very special green space in the local community. There are so many beautiful flora and fauna species in the gully. It is a very popular place for runners/walkers/dog walking etc. The community love this space and use it regularly. Flat Rock Gully will be ruined by the proposed plans. Trees and habitats and species will be cleared/put under pressure. There are very few remaining urban wildlife corridors. It is a travesty that this one is to be impacted by the proposed project.

3. I object to the project due to the scale, extent and risk of groundworks in sensitive residential areas and foreshore environments for example, there will be extensive contamination to Flat Rock and Middle Harbour by the proposed works. The spill from the mining impacts will be dumped on our foreshore and into our harbour, mixing with waste water and impacting the creeks and surrounding areas.

4. I object to the project due to the unreasonable level of impact on the Quality of Life of residents during the tunnel construction and operation because the high level of noise, dust, heavy vehicle pollution and traffic will impact the whole surrounding community. This will go on for years and the government has proven itself incapable of managing and reducing these impacts.

5. I object to the project as it is a tolled road and there is little evidence that it will alleviate current congestion. The traffic studies are incomplete (and notoriously inaccurate in any case). Pushing more people into cars is not a long term climate friendly solution. The project has a poor climate profile at a time when we should be looking to projects which reduce our emissions. The government should be creating more public transport and cycle solutions.

6. I object to the project as there has been no publicly published business case and the costs demonstrated in the EIS seem to far outweigh the benefits. The EIS also fails to fully scope many aspects such as utilities and contamination which poses a risk to the project.

7. I object to the project because the B-Line buses have been successful in reducing congestion and no public transport alternative study has been done with which to compare this project.

This project is a missed opportunity to transform Sydney into a world class, healthy and sustainable city with a strong public transport system. The EIS demonstrates that this toll road will be extremely expensive to build and high risk with little benefit. I would ask that an alternative public transport feasibility study be published before any further planning occurs so that impacts and outcomes can be fairly compared.

I write to express my objection to the Beaches Link and Gore Hill Freeway Project. With it’s zero public transport options, this is a project that made very little sense for a sustainable, modern and forward-thinking city in pre-COVID times (there was no valid business case then), and now, in a post-COVID world has even less relevance or efficacy (certainly still no business case now that COVID has changed in a very fundamental way, the operations of Sydney in terms of working, commuting and living).

I strongly object to this project, with numerous reasons:

- It has been shown repeatedly that building tunnels encourages more vehicles on to the roads. We should be giving reasons for people not to get into their cars, not creating reasons to use them. Funneling more vehicles into tunnels only serves to create bottle necks at the Gore Hill Freeway and city entrances. Peak hour traffic already gets stuck coming off the Harbour Bridge. This tunnel does not make adequate allowances to encourage public transport

- The proximity of several schools to unfiltered smoke stakes is a huge concern, children are especially vulnerable to fine particle emissions.

- The huge number of trucks that will be using suburban roads will create a massive toll on local streets and residents.

- The huge problem with toxic particles surfacing in the water around Middle Harbour due to dredging. I feel this has not adequately been addressed. We face up to 6 years of poorly impacted water quality meaning very popular swimming spots such as Clontarf will be unusable for swimming and water sports. Also, I believe the impact on marine life has not been adequately considered.

- The destruction of unique ecosystems that are home to many animals and greatly loved by the communities – Burnt Bridge Creek and Ferntree Gully for example.

- I strongly disagree with the forced acquisition of properties and the distress this causes families.

- The previous reporting on saved time on commutes is out of date and does not take into consideration the huge impact Covid has had on the number of people working from home. This is a change that will stay for many people.

I implore you to take into consideration the number of local communities who are strongly against the tunnel being built.

I object to this NB Tunnel on the grounds of environmental destruction, health and well-being of humans, pollution from stacks, destroyed water ways including catchment areas, middle harbour, beaches, loss of animals and habitat, devastation of local roads, rat running, devastating living conditions during construction. This proposed tunnel must be halted. NSW government is only building it to safe face. It is not the best option for public transport. If NSW government is serious about infrastructure to the Northern beaches why not extend trains from Chatswood to Dee Why then to Mona Vale ? This proposed tunnel is only to benefit the coffers of Transurban and complete Transubans monopoly of Sydney’s tollways. I plead with this government to STOP this project and consider better alternatives. The government plans to spend so much money, destruction of our area with a road tunnel that will be obsolete by the time it opens! I object to this tunnel. Since the day I found out about this tunnel , I have been consumed about it. I feel anxious and sick about it. It has impacted my life immensely and I dread to think what is going to happen if it goes ahead. I truly believe this is not for the best for the Northern beaches. It will destroy our beautiful area.

Unfortunately the business case for the project has never been proven. Post Covid, it is now very much a white elephant. With a lot of city workers working from home 2/3 days per week, the incidence of traffic is much reduced. From North Seaforth I can be parked at my office in Barangaroo in 20 minutes by car (obeying speed limits via Spit/Military Rd/Harbour Bridge etc) if I leave weekdays around 630am. Its not a question of traffic - it's a question of smart management of existing resources. My house is 14km from the Opera House - that is a very acceptable existing commute and far better than other world class cities. I have 3 kids and a busy job - I just manage my work/personal commute smartly and either travel off-peak and work from home when I can (further reducing traffic 2/3 days a week). With 21st century technology and clear global priorities (climate change, electric cars etc), building a massive tunnel to encourage more polluting cars is a relic of a bygone era - and should be left there. This tunnel is an extremely poor solution searching for a problem. You build a few pedestrian bridges etc towards the city (removing a few sets of traffic lights) and it will reduce existing bottlenecks even more significantly. And save the taxpayer $13.75bn in the process. There is a massive impact of the 5 year construction process (chances of overruns high!) on the local community, the desecration of native land, and then living with 2 massive (unfiltered!) ventilation stacks in the community near schools and many houses. A complete shocker. Not needed. Not wanted. Devised initially as a political tool without any credible business case. But it's not too late. Please do not go ahead with this. Imagine what we can do with the $14bn to improve the quality of lives (hospitals, schools etc) in Sydney and NSW? I wish you well in your decision making - please prioritise our planets future and that of our children.

My reasons for objecting are set out in the attached submission.

My son is a student at Balgowlah Boys. My question is regarding Community Receiver sites. Why has Balgowlah Boys School not been give Community Receiver sensitivity status when it’s the closest school to the Beaches Link exhaust stack and construction site?
CH12 of the EIS deals with air quality. Section 12:12 deals with Community Receivers. Described as follows in the EIS.
• ‘Community receivers. These were taken to be representative of particularly sensitive locations such as schools, childcare centres and hospitals within a zone up to 1.5 kilometres either side of the Western Harbour Tunnel and Beaches Link program of works corridor, and generally near significantly affected roadways. In total, 42 community receivers were included in the assessment (refer to Figure 12-3).
I quote from section 12:12 of Chapter-12 of the EIS: "While some sensitive locations might not have been selected as representative community receivers, they have still been assessed as residential, workplace and recreational receivers in the model. For example, while the Northern Beaches Secondary College – Balgowlah Boys Campus has not been included as a community receiver, the potential air quality impacts at that location have been predicted and are considered in the discussion of results for residential, workplace and recreational receivers below in Section 12.5 and Section 12.6.”
Your report identifies the following locations as Community Receivers in the Balgowlah area closest to the construction site.
Appendix-H, Air Quality: Part-1 pages 103-104.
1. CR28: Peek a Boo Cottage
2. CR29: St Cecilia’s Catholic Primary School
3. CR30: Seaforth Public School
4. CR31: Punchinello Kindergarten
In the same order these locations are the following straight-line distances from the location of the exhaust stack and acoustic shed area of the Balgowlah Construction site
1. CR28: Peek a Boo Cottage: South West - 870 meters
2. CR29: St Cecilia’s Catholic Primary School: South East – 420 meters
3. CR30: Seaforth Public School: West to South West – 358 meters
4. CR31: Punchinello Kindergarten: North East – 420 meters
Balgowlah Boys Campus is directly due south of the construction site and is a mere 322 meters away. It is by far the closest location. It has around 1000 Y7 to Y12 students. It is the only location due south of the construction site, yet it’s not deemed to be particularly sensitive enough to be a “Community Receiver”.
Can you please explain this oversight?