MOD 2 - Adjustment to Operational Boundary and Building Height

The documents are very comprehensive so rather than refer to them, let me declare in layman's term - this project negatively impacts my family.
The lights, noise and visual impact of this project concerns me greatly given my family live in Slessor Rd Casula.  The SSFL already disturbs our sleep and building the intermodal for increased capacity will only exacerbate this. It is common knowledge how detrimental disturbed sleep is to the whole person.  Having a child in year 12 (and two to follow) only adds more stress to the situation.  The construction and ongoing operations will increase noise and light to the area. 
I have little faith in the reports produced to justify these works.  We were told the construction of the SSFL would not impact our quality of life and it has - train noise wakes us each and every night.  We purchased our home prior to the construction of SSFL.  We backed onto Throsbie Park and the Regional Park, a great aspect for our family...and now we back onto a freight line and intermodel precinct.
The intermodel and associated projects are causing us real stress.  We are not against progress, but residents should not be ignored.  If it is not feasible to construct barriers around the project site, please put mitigating measures in my home.  We are real people, we need you to hear us. 

This Modification has also listed / asked for the following changes..
"Amendments are also sought to increase operational noise criteria and to allow for the storage of Dangerous Goods on-site at warehouse areas 5 and 6."
I STRONGLY object to the above changes to be included in the amendment as these proposed changes will have a great impact on the health and well-being of the community (to all living beings, inclusive of human, animal and plant life). Also, in my view, by increasing the height , I feel, this will be introducing more movement of trucks and material in/out of the suburb which will create additional worry in terms of traffic/accidents/noise/pollution etc.

My family and our community find extremely neglectful this entire project has been approved extremely close to residential areas considering the negative environment, health, and high traffic impacts which have been extensively highlighted by nearby residents before the approval was made. It's a shameful government decision impacting our community and a complete lack of consideration for human health and the environment. The great majority of nearby residents were against the project and their voices and concerns were completely ignored.
Now the project wants to make all those negative impacts ever worse by increasing the height limit to 52m. I find this application the nail in the coffin for our community.
I'm extremely disappointed on our federal government, both Liberal and Labour. I would like to see the people involved with the approval of this project living at Wattle Grove, Casual or Moorebank after it is 100% operational. What a disgrace for our community.

I object to the alterations to this project. They are all offensive and should not be allowed. Especially the health and safety issue involved where allowance may be created to store dangerous goods.

Please refer to attachments.

The Intermodal got through on the documents supplied with much public dispute, now amazingly & typical it wants to go from an already easily visible 7 storey's high to 15 storeys high, more than double. This will be highly visible by all the housing in the Wattle Grove, Casula & many surrounding areas. This does not fit in with anything around the vicinity & will be a total eye sore for the area. These eye sores are popping up everywhere around other areas with no regards to the residence in these areas. It is bad enough being in the middle of major growing housing areas, let alone being 15 storey's high with dangerous goods. The other commercial locations like Eastern Creek & Bakers Lane Kemps Creek where these eye sores are more suited than in the middle of housing areas.

The height restriction should not be increased so close to a residential area. The suburbs of Wattle Grove and Moorebank are populated by family homes, rather than apartment blocks and the height of the intermodal precinct will now dominate the skyline. This is hugely inappropriate.

In addition, the storing of dangerous chemicals in the intermodal area should be prohibited. There is no justification to housing such dangerous goods so close to residential housing. Given that there have been no fewer than 2 serious factory fires in Moorebank and severe bushfires through Moorebank to Heathcote occuring over the past 12 months, it is unjustifiable to house dangerous goods so close to residential housing.

This proposition must not be allowed to progress forward without further discussion with the community.

I object to any further increases in height or extension beyond current approvals due to the impact it will have on nearby residential areas.
Specifically no increase in height a, noise or dangerous goods approvals

Being a local resident of Wattle Grove I object to the modification of the maximum building height to be increased by over 50% from 21m to 45m

In regards to the building height increase request to assist the workers on site I strongly object, as the result of the Woolworths project will result in the net loss of 1,600 jobs.
The same will happen to any further projects as they seek to maximize output at the expense of jobs due to automation and robotics. The claim that it will assist in the creation of jobs by the proponents and their report managers is ludricous in the extreme.
Secondly to allow dangerous goods onto the site is a fundamental change to the initial DA consent conditions, thus the whole Da should be re started from scratch.
The recent Beirut experience should be heeded as a serious example of what NOT to do especially with surrounding housing in close proximity. Whether it explosive corrosive or poisonous risk that is proposed, it should NEVER be allowed.
Thirdly to allow a change to the operational noise levels to be adjusted in detriment to surrounding residents up to 3 Km away 24/7 is also a fundamental change to the Da's initial consent, it too should be rejected and strict measures put in place for noise abatement compliance of the existing consent conditions.

Intermodal has taken away a fair chunk of green land that our suburb had. Further changes (increasing size and height) will lead to further deterioration of natural resources. Containers stacked close to the Glenfield road had suffered major damage during the storms in Feb'20. They had toppled and thus pose a safety risk to the commuters on the road. Slow and steady encroachment of our green land is unacceptable.

The submission is suppose to include the allowance to store dangerous goods. There is no mention of dangerous goods in these documents. I object to the storage of unknown dangerous goods. What class of dangerous goods?

I also object to the increase in noise. I have no idea how many dB we are currently experiencing in Wattle Grove day or night. Where is any comparison in either documents or any previous documents. I do not want any change in the noise in my street thank you as I am sure the rest of Wattle Grove. Also, poor Casula, Glenfield and Moorebank closer to the site. Also, the noise from the freight trains I hope this does not impact on Wattle Grove which is a RESIDENTIAL AREA of which I am an original land owner and purchased in 1993.

I object to the height increase also. The assessment from Corryton Court Wattle Grove is on the bases that the trees remain insitu, therefore how can this be guaranteed into the future. I am appalled at the view that residents in Casula will suffer.

The height restriction should not be increased so close to a residential area. The suburbs of Wattle Grove and Moorebank are populated by family homes, rather than apartment blocks and the height of the intermodal precinct will now dominate the skyline. This is hugely inappropriate.

In addition, the storing of dangerous chemicals in the intermodal area should be prohibited. There is no justification to housing such dangerous goods so close to residential housing. Given that there have been no fewer than 2 serious factory fires in Moorebank and severe bushfires through Moorebank to Heathcote occuring over the past 12 months, it is unjustifiable to house dangerous goods so close to residential housing.

This proposition must not be allowed to progress forward without further discussion with the community.

I refer to the public exhibition of the two matters which are on exhibition until 24th August and wish to submit a number of stong objections which have a huge impact on the area which if any previous objections are any guide will be ignored
1 Their is much concern about the raising of building height from 21 netres to 45 metres and many are concerned if it is in relation to the storing of dangerous chenicals which with a 100000 in a 2km raidius is not appropriaste for the current location which will pose a massive health and safety issue for the area and with the massive traffic observed over the last 5 months is not possible

2 Noise is continually been overlooked and one wonders how it can be changed given previous court decisions.My esperience is that noise cannot be mitigated as there have been many recent noises which I have located as being over 3km away as is experienced in Port Botany also residents have complained about the present noise levels which are never addressed
3 I have seen evidence on page 43 where there is talk of 2 concrete batching plants which have been previously denied in previous enquires which greatly alarms me adding to the pollution in the area which is already recognised as being the worst in NSW mainly as a result of huge traffic flows in the area and one must question the concern of our politicians who constantly talk of their concern for our welfare
4 With a large population with 53 per cent under 34 it would be better planning to have this project in a much more industrialised area and with the area the matter of a huge increase in population their vehicles have no chance in accessing our roads which would require upgrades to 34 intersections and the piecemeal attempts to improve traafic is a complete failure
5 The area being a area of bad health with the highest number of residents with diabetes asthma and a 5 percent higher mortality rate which is surely recognised with the size of Liverpool Hospital and a seminar I attended last year confirmed my beliefs in August last year
6 As stated I vigorisly oppose this project for its impact on residents and how it will impact on our wildlife like koalas and 27 threatened endangered spicies and Plants like the Hibberia Fumana grevillea Cumberland plain trees
7 The area is on a island and having experienced huge flooding events in chipping Norton and Cambridge
8 There is talk about moving Moorebank Avenue closer to the wattle grove estate posing a much greater risk to residents re noise pollution

In the years 2002 and 2018, major bushfires occurred on land within and adjacent to the Moorebank Intermodal site.The 2002 fire destroyed several Wattle Grove properties whilst the 2018 bushfire swept through the southern part of the Intermodal and took over 7 days and only after 500 firefighters were brought in to control the blaze. The firefighters involved acknowledged that they lost control of the fire and it was only due to weather changes they were able to extinguish the blaze. The most fortunate aspect of the 2018 fire was that the wind on the initial days was blowing directly from the west . Had it blown from a southerly direction,many houses in Wattle Grove would have been destroyed such was the strength of the fire.

I now find it remarkable that given the universal acknowledgement that we will experience more intense and large scale fire scenarios, the Intermodal proponents wish to instal 2 dangerous material warehouses adjacent to the local vegetation areas . On top of this, the proponents have confirmed that trains carrying Isotainers (the containers that carry dangerous and toxic chemicals) will not be excluded from the Intermodal site.

Most of the local community recognise that objecting to any of the Intermodal modifications is a waste of time. The proponents have confirmed (at the Community Consultation Committee meetings ) that to date no modification applications have been rejected.This statistic clarifies how telling the disempowerment of communities has been with the incumbant state government.

I strenuously oppose the raising of the building height above the 21 Metres Limitation due to the negative affects the visual pollution would have on my property and the properties of thousands of other residents surrounding the site.
The area of West Moorebank is too close to habitation for such enormous sheds (Warehouses) to dominate the skyline. The Proponent should be advised by assessment officers to be satisfied with the current dispensation of 21 Metres Limitation being provided by NSW Planning and subsequently the NSW Government and the People of NSW.

I OBJECT to the above application for the following reasons:

I OBJECT to the application for Dangerous Goods Storage.

The proposed modification area is surrounded by highly a populated residential, commercial, educational, cultural and recreational parkland areas, this includes all the residents from Casula, Moorebank and Wattle Grove comprising from low density homes to high rise towers, childcare centres, schools, the Casula Parkland playgrounds, the Casula Powerhouse, the NSW Barefoot Water Ski Club on the Georges River and many more local business.

This creates a huge risk to the wellbeing and safety of residents within the above mentioned vicinities, was there to be a mishandling that could lead to an explosion, a fire with toxic smoke/fumes or a leak into to the Georges ecosystem.

My living area and bedrooms are all easterly facing with large glass windows. I will be directly impacted if any of the above was to occur. I will not have peace of mind and will live in fear of such events.

I OBJECT to the application for Height Increase:

This will block the current horizon view not just for myself but for a large portion of residents. There are a large number of homes that will have their main living area facing large warehouse walls by day and affected by the light pollution by night. This will directly impact the quality of living and the value of property.

The Viewpoints for Casula Road and Canberra Ave. are not a true representation on how we are directly affected. Please see the attached pictures from my living area and bedrooms.

I OBJECT to the application for noise increase.

The increase of noise levels will directly impact quality of life for many residents and myself. The lower vegetation on the Georges river does not provide a buffer zone as the sound travels up to where the majority of dwellings are built along Casula Rd and Canberra avenue.

Already we are impacted by the noise generated by nightworks at the site and an increase of noise levels will cause stress, sleep disturbance and possible psychological problems.

I object to Moorebank Intermodal Precinct West SSD-5066-MoD 2 and SSD-7709-Mod-1. These applications constitute major and inappropriate changes to the approved plans and should be declined.

I make the following points:

The virtual writing out of an important NSW listed historical item, Glenfield Farm. We own the site, which is close to and overlooks MPW. The related issues of unlawful excessive noise, which the applicants seek to have made legitimate; and the proposed destruction of distant vistas and sightlines representing a major loss in terms of Glenfield Farm’s visual curtilage, and the historic views from the escarpment known locally to be of importance to indigenous people. I note that the applicants appear to deny the existence of these sightlines, which can be viewed any day of the week. Other issues of great concern to me are the request to have dangerous goods warehoused at MPW, and the dangerous implications of trucks on the highly congested Liverpool roads, ferrying these dangerous items to their destinations through heavy traffic and residential areas. There is a heightened risk, due to documented inappropriately high traffic levels, of a catastrophic accident. The further attempt to acquire even more ecologically sensitive land on a huge development site is inappropriate. If the MPW development is unable to turn a profit under existing conditions and on the existing site, the land could be productively uptaken by Liverpool City Council. LCC has an existing plan for the site comprising a landscaped technology park which would provide high local employment prospects, and also tie in with the developing Aerotropolis.

Historic Glenfield Farm and noise.

My husband and myself are the owners of Glenfield Farm, listed as being of exceptional importance to New South Wales heritage. Yet in these latest modification applications, it is difficult to even discern in the pale grey surrounding maps, the three acres comprising the Glenfield Farm holding which sits at the top of the Leacock Regional Park escarpment and directly overlooks the MPW site. The apparent omission of the Glenfield Farm complex means the early European and Aboriginal significance of the escarpment and its historic farm and surrounding parkland may be effectively left out of the planning process. Glenfield Farm is then treated as one “sensitive receiver” instead of as an important historic site, house, and farm buildings to be assessed and protected as a matter of importance to the state of NSW.

I protest this ongoing situation. A protracted community court case, RAID v Qube in the NSW Land and Environment Court, that dealt directly with with excessive and unlawful projected noise, particularly wheel squeal, in respect to the highly curved spur line built close to our property, under a different consent, resulted in the placing of conditions relating to noise specifically in respect to Glenfield Farm. I note that I have been recently approached with a view to placing noise monitoring equipment on Glenfield Farm to measure the spur line “wheel squeal” before the tight radius Southern spur line is actually in use by goods trains. Now the latest modification application attempts to raise the legal noise limits by a large margin. It appears to run against the conditions placed by the court in respect to another consent. Yet the applicants, in court, heard arguments that unlawful and excessive noise, 24 hours a day, places the long term viability of Glenfield Farm at risk. It seems to me that the continued feeding in to the system of modification applications for the Moorebank Intermodal development will result in a lack of clarity for residents such as myself, even if conditions have been imposed by the courts. It is not a viable option for residents to engage in multiple court actions dealing with essentially, the same issues, in this case, excessive noise impacts on Glenfield Farm.

As we have previously submitted, if the impacts of raising allowable noise limits cause the buildings to be uninhabitable, they will simply go the same way of many other historic places. The building is not able to be modified to mitigate noise impacts, because of the historically important fabric. The modification application regarding raising noise limits should be declined, as the issue of excessive noise has been extensively examined.

Warehouse height changes.

As discussed, the radical change in height of warehouses on MPW is a major transformational element that will be imposed on the historic curtilage of Glenfield Farm, and will also destroy for good the panoramic view from the top of the escarpment, which we do not need the book Dark Emu to tell us, represents thousands of years of indigenous peoples’ occupation and significance. I am aware of the importance placed on the site of Glenfield Farm by indigenous people, also the former presence of a destroyed important scar tree nearby, and even an early painting depicting the first settlers of Glenfield Farm with an aboriginal family camping in the front yard. Trees of the regional park do not obscure this rare panoramic view, as asserted. The loss of the highly locally significant escarpment views will just be another everyday heritage tragedy in Australia, but nevertheless, this increase in height should not be allowed. It does appear to make a travesty of the original consents, where heights were limited to preserve visual amenity. Warehouses in all areas of the development should comply with the existing height restrictions, which were placed with good reason, to protect the amenity of residents.

Dangerous goods.

The modification asks for a dispensation to allow the handling and warehousing of dangerous goods. The position of the MPW site in the heart of Liverpool, a densely populated residential and commercial area, make this a most inappropriate site for dangerous goods.
The blast pattern of the Beirut explosion should be placed over the Liverpool map to assess the consequences of such an accident, which would have heavy impacts for a 10 km radius. The Liverpool central business district is sited around five kilometres from the MPW site, and even closer are densely populated suburbs such Casula and Moorebank, which would also be in the zone for extremely destructive blast impacts. It would in my opinion be disingenuous to propose that Australian regulations would not allow such an accident to happen here - the Ruby Princess related system failures of apparently robust processes demonstrate the real risks to the Liverpool community of this proposal. Further layers of risk are added with the possibility of toxic gas escaping at a time of atmospheric inversion (a regular atmospheric occurrence in the area) and the risk of toxic spills ending up in the nearest drain (the ecologically sensitive Georges River). This proposal does not appear to me to proffer the high quality tenants that the Moorebank Intermodal initially mentioned. This modification application, which presents previously unforeseen serious dangers to the Liverpool community, should be declined. That this modification has been even suggested should bring home the potentially disastrous consequences of siting a huge and inappropriate industrial area, with all of the accompanying problems such as huge fleets of trucks overwhelming the road network, in the heart of a growing, densely populated residential and commercial area. Liverpool is on track to be the largest city in Sydney within the next ten years. Seen in this context, the modification applications should be declined, and the developers should be barred from making further such applications.


As a general comment I wish to emphasise that continual, relentless modification applications that are allowed to go on for years and years, wearying objectors and creating confusion around important matters, create a fertile environment for conditions that pose a major threat to public safety, amenity, and the environment of the affected area.

I object the planned storage of Dangerous Goods on-site at warehouse areas 5 and 6.

I moved to casula as it was a peaceful area, to bring my kids up in a place with nice greenery that was not too far away from the CBD. We all enjoy the horizon view from Marsh parade and this project will completely ruin that. Furthermore we do not want any light and noise pollution. Finally what would you possibly need to store in 45 storeys? This is rather concerning and we firmly object!