Visy Dry Recyclables Facility

We are objecting the plans for Visy to open up a recycling plant next door to us. More dust and trucks let alone the vermin. Cardboard food packing will be also recycled and the rodent numbers will increase for sure. Truck numbers will increase on a current very busy road.
200 metres away on Sydney Park rd is residential. I dont understand why we would approve more recycling businesses in this area. Dealing with the current concrete plants and general waste recycling plants regarding trucks and dust is bad enough.
Thank you

My name is Brett Kovac and I am the Head of Property and Integrations at Only About Children. We operate a childcare centre at 95 Burrows Road, Alexandria NSW 2015. Only About Children Pty Ltd strongly objects to the proposal by Visy to build new drying facilities at 112 Euston Road, Alexandria.

Our concerns relate to the following areas:

• Smell and odours from the site impacting children day to day
• Direct and adverse effects on air quality impacting children day to day
• Additional noise and traffic from truck movements in the area

This area is a heavily industrialised area currently being severely impacted by the building of the West Connex. It is unacceptable that Visy proposes to compound the negative effects of the West Connex by building such a facility.

The building of a facility of this type within a short distance of our childcare centre will adversely affect the health and wellbeing of our children, team and families.

If Visy insists on building this facility, we look forward to hearing how Visy will, at its cost, put measures in place in minimise the adverse effects on our childcare centre.

The Department of Primary Industries has reviewed this proposal and has no comment.

EES response attached

Further information required from the proponent regarding Air Quality Assessment

see attached submission SUB-6342

I write in connection with the Visy Dry Recyclables Facility (SSD‐10364) application. I have examined the
plans and I know the site well. I wish to OBJECT STRONGLY to the development of this facility in this
location.
In addition, I’m providing a SUGGESTION, which might alleviate some of my concerns for your
consideration.
Reasons for the strong objection
1. The proposed facility will produce an incremental increase in some already high level of
pollutants in the area. The Air Quality Impact Assessment indicates that
 the predicted total annual average PM2.5 concentrations are at or exceeding the impact
assessment criterion (Table 7‐1).
 the predicted ground‐level concentrations of Formaldehyde (VOC) are significantly
exceeding the impact assessment criterion (Table 7‐3).
2. The future traffic levels on Euston Road/Sydney Park Road intersection in conjunction with the
New M5 predicted levels, as documented in Table 6 of the Traffic Impact Assessment, are
indicating operation of LoS category F or at best D level in 2023/2033.
These levels correspond to “Unsatisfactory and require additional capacity” or “Operating near
capacity” respectively.
3. It is hard to believe in the accuracy of the following predicted road traffic noise generation
associated with the operation of the facility (page 24 Noise & Vibration Impact Assessment, as
they show similar noise increase values for two vastly different source sizes.
In particular:
 Additional 37 heavy vehicle movements on 105‐155 Euston Road allegedly will contribute
0.3dB increase in road traffic noise during the day and 0.4dB at night.
 Additional 185 heavy vehicle movements on Sydney Park road allegedly will contribute
0.3dB increase in road traffic noise during the day and 0.5dB at night.
A noise of 220 heavy vehicles during the day, decelerating to stop and accelerating from the
stationary position on the traffic lights at Sydney Park Road/Euston road intersection, in the
perception of a reasonable person, must be significantly larger than predicted increases.
Suggestion
Some of the concerns can be effectively addressed by changing development plans in such a manner that
access to/from the planned facility is relocated from Burrows Road to Euston Road (with traffic light
control to facilitate entry/exit from the facility).
This would enable routing of the heavy vehicle traffic from/towards Princes Hwy (as expected by the plan)
through non‐residential areas of Euston Road (south) and Campbell Street, avoiding overbearing traffic in
residential areas in the Euston Road (north) and creating traffic gridlock at the Burrows Road and Huntley
Street intersections.

Also the plans are flawed and should be reconsidered when the following facts are taken into consideration:-

NOTE:-
1. The plans appear to show an outdated version of the new Westocnnex intersection at5 Sydney Park Road and Euston Road, they have removed the southbound right turn bus lane.
2. Pollution levels have not been adjusted to take into account the forecasted extra traffic from the soon to open Westconnex link.

A copy of the TfNSW response is attached.

Please see attached response

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to lodge my support for the proposed application. We are a large primary producer within NSW growing and processing poultry at multiple sites within the Greater Sydney region.
Due to the current drought conditions we are being put under a huge amount of pressure not only in the cost of feed pricing but also in various other inputs within our business. One significant increase in cost we are incurring is the sourcing of available bedding material on which to grow our birds. The impact of the drought means suitable bedding materials are becoming harder to source or are simply not available. This means other products are being pulled into regions that would normally use items such as rice hulls as a bedding material, these are a bi-product of rice production and are currently not available due to limited water. Also chopped straw can be used but again due to lack of water crops are often unable to be planted and any straw that is produced is being baled for forage. This is therefore not a viable option even in the regions where these crops are grown.
Some examples of bedding in this region include hardwood shavings and pine sawdust. One suitable and readily available option would be items such as shredded timber products and mulches etc. This is a good sustainable and viable option and also has the benefits in terms of being a recycled product. The demand on these products and the current number of suppliers is unable to meet the current demand from within Sydney, let alone the demand that is coming from producers in other regions of NSW. To give you an idea of the extent of the demand we need somewhere in the region of 87,356 m3 of bedding material as a minimum in order to meet our compliance and welfare requirements.
Therefore we are in support of the application of the recycling facility and hope to discuss options with the company if successful to help both parties find viable solutions to assist with our business with the above supply issues.

Regards

David Parrott
Farming Manager

1.SERIOUS HEALTH CONCERNS REGARDING EXISTING TOXIC AIR QUALITY FROM EXISTING SURROUNDING OPERATIONS, INCLUDING BUILDING MATERIAL WASTE DUST. TOXIC DUST CAN BE FOUND INSIDE OUR PREMISES, EXTERNALLY, ON WALKWAYS AND ROAD. IT IS ATROCIOUS. TOXIC DUST IS CORRODING OUR BUILDING - WHAT IS IT DOING TO OUR HEALTH ? VISY HAS MEASURED AIR QUALITY FROM AIR MONITORING IN EARLWOOD - WHY DON'T THEY COME AND TAKE SAMPLES FROM OUTSIDE THE PROPOSED FACILITY TO GIVE US THE TRUE READING ? WHAT IS THE TOXIC DUST DOING TO THE CHILD CARE CENTRE NEXT DOOR - WHAT WILL BE THE EFFECT OF ANOTHER RECYCLING FACILITY ?

2. VISY PROPOSES TO HAVE A VENTILATION SYSTEM ON TOP OF THEIR ROOF. THE EXISTING ROOFLINE OF THE PROPOSED PLANT IS IN LINE WITH OUR TOP FLOOR, WITH A HIGH WIND CORRIDOR FROM THE SOUTH DIRECTLY INTO OUR FACTORY COMPLEX. ODOURS AND ANY TOXIC PARTICLES ARE OF GREAT CONCERN TO OUR HEALTH AND WELLBEING FROM THIS VENTILATION EXPOSURE.

3. TRAFFIC CONGESTION. FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, MANY PREMISES HAVE HAD ISSUES WITH ENTRY AND EXIT INTO BURROWS RD. AND SURROUNDING STREETS - AND ALEXANDRIA IN GENERAL. THERE ARE ALREADY TOO MANY TRUCKS NEAR THE PROPOSED VISY FACILITY - WITH NEARLY DAILY ILLEGAL PARKING ON NO STOPPING AREAS OR EVEN ON THE FOOTPATH FACING THE WRONG WAY - OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC AND VISIBILITY. HOW CAN WE SUSTAIN EVEN MORE TRUCKS NEAR THE PROPOSED FACILITY. FURTHER, ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES WILL BECOME EVEN MORE DIFFICULT.

4. NOISE AND ROAD VIBRATIONS FROM MACHINERY, TRUCKS & LARGE FORKLIFTS IS ALREADY HIGH. VISY'S NOISE MEASUREMENT FROM ANOTHER PART OF THE SUBURB ARE NOT REALISTIC FOR THE AREA AROUND THE PROPOSED FACILITY. OUR FACTORY COMPLEX SHAKES WHEN THERE ARE LARGE TRUCKS AND MACHINERY BEING USED - IT IS NOT A COMFORTABLE WORKPLACE - AND WILL GET WORSE WITH INCREASED ACTIVITY. ESPECIALLY WITH 24/7 OPERATION AND MORE TRUCKS & PROCESSING.

5. PROPOSED FACILITY WILL BE A MAJOR FIRE HAZARD

6. ALEXANDRIA HAS CHANGED - BURROWS RD. HAS CHANGED TOO, THERE ARE NEW BUILDINGS BUILT & BEING BUILT (BOTH RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL), WE HAVE A CHILD CARE CENTRE, THERE IS A BREWERY/RESTAURANT, FITNESS STUDIO, MANY HIGH TECH BUSINESSES - DOES A RECYCLING PLANT OR BUILDING WASTE PLANT FIT INTO THE CURRENT CHANGING DEMOGRAPHICS ?

Hi Katelyn

Please find attached the City's response to the proposal.

Regards

David Zabell
Senior Planner