Kendall Bay Sediment Remediation Project

the bay has cleaned itself through time and should be left alone
the beach is quite clean with fish and dolphins frequenting the bay.
children play on the beach
the remediation process should be abanded

The meeting with the Jemena company members provided a platform for local
residents such as myself to be informed of the procedures intended to
be employed on the remediation of sediment removal from Kendal Bay.
The intended process was fully explained to me and assurances were
given that any comments or concerns I had would be considered and
dealt with in the management statement or considered to be included.
As a resident who lives right on the river bank and facing the wharf
where the offloading will take place my major concern is Odour. This
point was discussed and assurances were given that Odour will be dealt
with within the Management statement. With the definition of odour
being clearly defined as foreign odour introduced in the offloading
area, such as diesel fumes from motor running continual fumes and
odours from the offloading vessels. To avoid continual disputes with
complaining residents as demonstrated at the meeting. The question was
raised by Member of the Jemena staff as how to define what an
unpleasant or foreign odour is. It was agreed at the meeting that to
avoid this type of dispute an Odour management statement should be
prepared and provided to all surrounding residents explaining the
following.
: Foreign odours introduced in the offloading area that can be
detected with a normal breath.
: Diesel fumes and odours from offloading vessels from continual
running of motors.
: Odours that are clearly from the offloading sight transported from
Kendal Bay,.
: Any odour detected should be considered undesirable without
verifying how strong or how bearable.
: Immediate action should be taken by Jemena appointed agents to make
the necessary changers to procedures responsible for any breach of the
odour management statement,

Kindest Regards
Bill Price.

The meeting with the Jemena company members provided a platform for local
residents such as myself to be informed of the procedures intended to
be employed on the remediation of sediment removal from Kendal Bay.
The intended process was fully explained to me and assurances were
given that any comments or concerns I had would be considered and
dealt with in the management statement or considered to be included.
As a resident who lives right on the river bank and facing the wharf
where the offloading will take place my major concern is Odour. This
point was discussed and assurances were given that Odour will be dealt
with within the Management statement. With the definition of odour
being clearly defined as foreign odour introduced in the offloading
area, such as diesel fumes from motor running continual fumes and
odours from the offloading vessels. To avoid continual disputes with
complaining residents as demonstrated at the meeting. The question was
raised by Member of the Jemena staff as how to define what an
unpleasant or foreign odour is. It was agreed at the meeting that to
avoid this type of dispute an Odour management statement should be
prepared and provided to all surrounding residents explaining the
following.
: Foreign odours introduced in the offloading area that can be
detected with a normal breath.
: Diesel fumes and odours from offloading vessels from continual
running of motors.
: Odours that are clearly from the offloading sight transported from
Kendal Bay,.
: Any odour detected should be considered undesirable without
verifying how strong or how bearable.
: Immediate action should be taken by Jemena appointed agents to make
the necessary changers to procedures responsible for any breach of the
odour management statement,

Kindest Regards
Bill Price.

I do not support the proposal and I would like to lodge a submission of
objection about the Development Application.

My ground for the objection is that removing the existing sediment and
delivering the replacement fill by use of public roads is
unreasonable.

The following are my reasons:

1. Both Mortlake and Breakfast Point are now high-density residential
areas. The residents of these suburbs were not involved in the
pollution of Kendall Bay and therefore it is unreasonable that they
have to bear the traffic of heavy vehicles for a period of between 18
months to two years from 7.00am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday and 8.00am
to 1.00pm on Saturday.

2. The project already designates that the remediation works will use
barges to transport materials to and from the sites in the bay to a
staging area at the end of Tennyson Road. Instead of using the staging
site and the end of Tennyson Road, these barges should instead proceed
to an area further up the Parramatta River to the area around Duck
River at Silverwater where there are already existing industrial sites
with associated heavy vehicles. A staging site could be established in
this area. The staging site would then only be 2 kilometers from
Parramatta Road passing through industrial areas compared with the 4
kilometers when using Tennyson Road passing through wholly residential
areas.

3. The project Traffic Impact Assessment estimates that there would be
10 heavy vehicle movements per day and that the impact was based on
estimates assuming a speed of 10 kph. I have seen the 18 foot truck
and dog rigs associated with building construction and also the
WestConnex project. I have never seen the truck and dog rigs
travelling at only 10 kph and I have always seen them travelling at
the maximum allowable speed limit which again would cause a large
impact on the tranquility of the residential areas.

4. The project Traffic Impact Assessment estimates that the truck and
dog rigs would add a 1% increase in the amount of traffic on Tennyson
Road. As an 18 foot truck and dog is approximately 6 times the size of
a normal car when considering both length and mass it is incorrect to
just calculate the increased traffic based on vehicle movements. At 6
times the six the impact should be calculated at least as a 6%
increase.

5. I also find the number of 10 heavy vehicle movements per day to be
too small. As can be seen with the WestConnex project the heavy truck
try very hard to maximize the number of loads that they carry to earn
more money. 10 heavy movements is only 5 trips per day and I find that
very hard to believe. There were no associated estimates of how fast
the sediment would be being extracted.

6. The project Traffic Impact Assessment shows a Swept Paths
Assessment for the roads between the staging site and Parramatta Road.
I have lived in Breakfast Point for 14 years and I drive along
Tennyson road nearly every day. I have found that the section of
Tennyson Road between the Herbert Street intersection and the Bertram
Street intersection which is located on a curve in the road is
extremely dangerous. Because it is on a curve many vehicles of the SUV
style tend to come over the center line of the road to ensure that
they are clear of parked cars. In the Swept Paths Assessment of this
section of the road supplied in the Traffic Impact Assessment was done
at a time when there were quite a few places where no cars are parked
in Tennyson Road. Current during the day every parking place in this
section of Tennyson Road always contains a car. I would therefore say
that it would be a traffic hazard to have 18 foot truck and dog rigs
driving along this section of road. Additionally, the Swept Paths
Assessment has only allowed a 500 mm clearance from vehicle body which
is insufficient in such a confined space as this section of road
considering the true speed that the truck and dog rigs would be
travelling at.
As one solution I would recommend that the 18 foot truck and dog rigs
at least use Bertrand Street to avoid this section of Tennyson Road.
As a better solution I would recommend that the project use my
previously documented request to use a staging area around Duck River
at Silverwater which would avoid this section of Tennyson Road and
also save the residents of this area between the staging point and
Parramatta Road of having to put up with the heavy traffic.

(1) Please ensure that pile driving for the placement of the sheet piles
does not commence before 0800 hrs.
(2) Please ensure that all contaminated sediments in the vicinity of
the mangroves are totally removed. We do not wish to go through this
exercise and find that contamination remains within the mangrove area.
No mangroves existed in the bay from the 1943 aerial photos so there
would be an accumulation of contamination in the beach area now
occupied by the mangroves.
Perhaps consideration should be given to returning the bay to the 1943
status with no mangroves present as indicated in the attached pdf.

Submission is attached

See attached document