Glebe Island Concrete Batching Plant and Aggregate Handling Facility

SUBMISSION RE THE PROPOSED HANSON CONCRETE BATCHING PLANT ON GLEBE
ISLAND.

REF SSD 17_8544-GIBI and land adjacent, Glebe Island, James Craig
Road, Rozelle. (lot 10 DP 11 707 10).

I STRONGLY OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:-

1) Noise Pollution. 24/7. Ship generators.
Machinery.
Trucks.
Ship movements. Thrusters and tugs.


Seriously detrimental to sleep and, as a result, health.
Massively effecting ability of "quiet enjoyment" of terraces and
balconies.
Noise is amplified when travelling across water.


2) Particulate Pollution. 24/7. Sulphur fumes from ships and tugs
engines and generators.
Diesel pollution from massive volume of heavily loaded trucks.
Dust and particulates from handling of cargoes of aggregates.
These pollutants are TOXIC!
Again, detrimental to health.
Again, effecting the ability for quiet enjoyment of balconies and
terraces.



3) Visual Pollution. 24/7 Intrusive, industrial structural directly in
front of apartments and balconies.
Light pollution from flood lights and ship and truck lights all night.

Potentially disrupting sleep with serious health impacts.
Impinging on quiet enjoyment of balconies and terraces during evenings
and nights.



4) Property Values. Values have already been seriously impacted by the
prospect of this development with prospective buyers
expressing serious concerns about the impacts listed above.

We are a retired couple and were relying on the property value for our
financial security in our later years.



Summary.
This area has been granted planning permission/approval over the last
ten years for high density apartment development. Its is no longer an
exclusively industrial part of Sydney.

There has to be an acknowledgement that the working harbour concept
now needs to co-exist with the huge number of new residents. These
residents should not, now, have health threatening infrastructure
imposed upon them. Nor should they have the "quiet enjoyment" of their
homes severely impacted. The impact is hugely magnified by the
proposal operating 24/7 at very high volumes.

The EIS provided by Hansons is flawed. It has based its conclusions on
old data sourced away from the current area of impact. It does not
allow for the current increased ambient noise levels and the
additional noise emanating from the proposed MUF facility by the Port
Authority. It admits that the various levels will exceed the EPA
limits!!! How can this be acceptable?

My wife (a cancer patient) and I are extremely fearful of the
potential serious health impacts on us if this proposal proceeds.

I therefore desperately plead that this proposal is refused.


John Logan.
Owner/Resident.
Evolve Building.
2 Bank Street,
Jacksons Landing,
Pyrmont.

Copies sent to the Premier and Member of Parliament Mr Alex Greenwich.

I believe with the current residential and commercial development
currently present around the inner west it would be extremely
beneficial for the approval to go ahead. The aggregate load out
facility would reduce the number of truck movements in/out of the CBD
by the company and further lower the risk for incident regarding its
road truck fleet as a direct result.

As residents of Pyrmont we would like ot object to yet another industrial
complex being built in what is the most densely populated areas in
Australia. We already have more than 360 cruise ships coming into the
White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal every year and the majority of these
use high sulphur content marine fuels which emit sulphate aerosols
which are extremely detrimental for human health and terrestrial and
aquatic environments. And for every cruise ship there is at least 1
refueling ship servicing the ship and they too use high sulphur
content fuel.

We then had the proposal to build a Multi User Facility on Glebe
Island which will see an additional 130 + ships per year coming into
the Bay and now have yet another proposal to build an Aggregate
Handling and Concrete Batching Facility also on the Island which will
further increase the number of ships coming into the Bay and the
majority of these ships (now estimated to be well in excess of 600 + a
year) will, as well as using the high sulphur content marine fuel, use
ship to port electricity which means that as well as emiting a high
level droning noise they will also belch out these poisonous fumes
into the atmosphere for the duration of their time in port, fumes
which have the potential to cause distasterous long term health
outcomes for the residents of the surrounding suburbs.

Coupled with this issue both the proposal for the Multi User Facility
and the Aggregate Handling and Concrete Batching Facility want to
operate 24/7 slap bang in the middle of a large urban area which will,
in our opinion, due to the noise, lighting,pollution and the increase
in the number of trucks on the access roads have a devestating impact
on the residents of the surrounding suburbs.

And as residents of the inner city we see the need for more community
facilities,sports areas and green open spaces and as the population of
the area increases particularly with the development of the Seafood
Market site the demand for these facilities is only going to increase
and to alienate an area such as Glebe Island for industrial
development when it could be developed as a beautiful community
facility and as a site for a much needed inner city sporting complex
and maybe down the track for another school for the area is simply
criminal and so short sighted it is not funny.

Finally it appears to us as if the Port Authority gets to be "Judge,
Jury and Executioner" in the decision making process for all of these
developments which goes against all of the supposed tenants of our
democracy and the decision to allow such polluting developments on the
Island could well come back to haunt the authority in the future in
the form of another asbestos scandal.

I STRONGLY OBJECT to this relocation of the Hanson aggregate handling and
cement batching facility to Glebe Island based on the following:
1) Moving this facility nearer to the densely populated residential
areas of Jackson's Landing, Pyrmont, Balmain,Rozelle will destroy the
peace, tranquility and values of these residential suburbs.
2) The bad air quality from the cement and aggregate dust and trucks
moving in and out will severely impact on the health of residents in
these areas esp the elderly and the asthma sufferers.
3) The noise from the ships loading and unloading will affect people
sleeping at night.
4) Worse still is that this will be a 24/7 facility.
5) There is no proper and continuous monitoring of this facility and
the ships docked there to make sure they do not exceed any pollution
and noise thresholds and limits.
6) Finally to allow such a structure and operation in front of and so
near to residential buildings is totally unacceptable.

I live in Pyrmont and although there is a strong sense of community and
belonging, I feel that 24/7 works will deface our experience of our
village and we were told that the area will become Sydney's silicon
valley and will attract less invasive industry - developing the
innovation and intellectual capacity of Australians for a change - the
mining boom is over! I am not opposed to progress and development but
a 24/7 operation in the heart of a densely populated area is
unacceptable. I also do not accept that 24/7 trucks will have a
"minimal" impact on our community - the noise, the pollution and the
activity will definitely make for less of a village atmosphere! We
want the same protection as our neighbours living under the flight
paths please.

I wish to lodge my objection to the above plans.
I am deeply concerned both by the plans for Glebe Island and by the
cavalier dismissal of any need to consider the well-being of residents
affected by them. Pyrmont is the most densely-populated suburb in
Sydney, largely as the result of an official encouragement of "urban
renewal" - school groups are regularly brought to the area to see this
strategy clearly evidenced in the attractive replacement of derelict
industrial sites by residential and associated commercial premises. To
date, this steady development has been heralded as a Sydney success
story.

1) MULTI-USER-FACILITY(proposed by the Ports Authority)

I hope the Ports Authority can be persuaded to consider the following;

. the argument that that the Multi-User-Facility is justified by this
being "a working harbour" does not consider the well-being of
residents who committed to living here in the light of the objectives
of the Bays Precinct and the 2000 Master Plan for White Bay and Glebe
Island;
. noise, pollution, dust and light 24/7 are inescapable concomitants
of this MUF plan and will affect the health and well-being of
residents a very short distance away from the site;
. traffic, already congested in this area, will be multiplied;
. vessels docking at and leaving the facility will impact dangerously
on the safety of others using this restricted waterway: fishing boats,
pleasure craft, dragon boats, entertainment boats et al.;
. airport schedules, construction sites, entertainment venues are all
subject to curfews and restrictions, in recognition of the deleterious
effects of incessant, loud noise on those who live nearby; the PA
claims the right to ignore this problem.


At the very least the project should be subject to an independent
environmental impact study; in fairness to all concerned we need to
have an objective assessment made of what we are confronting and an
investigation by the Department of Planning.

2) APPLICATION NO. SSD 8544. Berth 1 and land adjacent, Glebe Island,
James Craig Road, Rozelle (lot 10 DP 11 707 10)
Applicant: Hansons Construction Materials Pty Ltd
Council Area Inner West
Consent Authority
Minister for Planning

. The objections that I have listed above to the Multi-User-Facility
(noise, pollution, disregard for nearby residents' well-being, traffic
congestion, and waterways dangers) also pertain to this project.
.The 24/7 nature of the operation is particularly concerning, and, as
mentioned above, deprives residents of the protections normally
afforded those who are subjected to noise and pollution issues.
. Of equal concern is the unreliability of the Environmental Impact
Study provided by Pacific Environment for the applicant: it contains a
disclaimer that the "report is based on the information made available
by the client" and "does not attempt to verify the accuracy, validity
or comprehensiveness of any information supplied". In at least one
instance the discrepancy between measured noise levels of ships which
have berthed at Glebe Island in the past (eg CSL Reliance in June
2017)and the figures "predicted" by Hansons is markedly in the
applicant's favour. (The very fact that the Hanson figures are
predictions and the other figures actual measurements should highlight
the logic of using the latter in determining noise impact from the
application.)

We who have come live in this area are committed to the concept of a
thriving, sustainable, and beautiful inner city; many of us have made
the change from leafy outer suburbs to inner Sydney because we
believed our city planners to be promoting this same vision. We hope
for your support in making sure mistakes are not made at this time.

Re: Glebe Island Aggregate Handling and Concrete Batching Facility (SSD
8544) Glebe Island, James Craig Road, Rozelle (lot 10 DP 11 707 10)

I am a resident at Refinery Drive, Pyrmont and lodge my strong
objection to the above titled proposal by Hanson Construction. I have
previously lodged my objection to the proposed MUF by the Ports
Authority.

The proposed development is to be located within 200 to 250 meters of
a major residential area and is intended to operate on a 24/7 basis.
The proposal is a backward step reverting Glebe Island to a heavy
industrial area completely ignoring the overall objectives and
principles of the Bays Precinct and the 2000 Master Plan for White Bay
and Glebe Island.


1. Emissions from ships burning crude diesel and fine dust particles
from unloading will severely impact air quality.
2. The noise from the ships engines/generators continually running
will result in night time noise levels above EPA limits impacting
residents sleep and wellbeing.
3. The entire wharf area will be artificially lit which will also
impact on the quality of sleep.
4. The proposed development will increase the already severe traffic
congestion in the area. If not on a standalone basis but certainly
when combined with other proposals for the area eg the MUF and the
construction of large concrete support beams for distribution to
infrastructure projects around Sydney eg the proposed new harbour
tunnel.


Existing use rights for the port facility should not be an acceptable
reason to disregard the health risks to nearby residents. Being told
by the PA that we can close our windows and doors against the noise
and dust is totally unacceptable and environmentally unsound.


The proposed Hanson development along with the proposed Multi User
Facility - operating on a 24/7 basis - will create significant noise,
light, water and air pollution and have a severely negative impact on
the health and wellbeing of residents in Pyrmont. These proposals
cannot be looked at on a standalone basis and must be looked at as a
whole and a proper EIS completed taking into account the impact of
both.

Given these serious impacts, I ask that you refuse the application or
introduce strong controls to protect local residential amenity.

I oppose the proposed facility as deleterious to Pyrmont and its
residents on the following grounds
1) unsuitable in such close proximity to residential neighbourhoods
2) traffic noise and congestion
3) 24 hour operation unsuitable in residential neighbourhood
4) dust and air pollution

I strongly object to the Hanson Concrete application for a batching
plant on Glebe Island. That, along with the accompanying multi-user
facility, fails our local community in so many ways, but my objection
will concentrate on pollution- mainly noise pollution, but light and
particulate pollution are also a big concern. The site is 150 metres
or less from our Evolve building and hundreds more nearby residents,
with nothing between us but water, whereas the current Blackwattle
site has very few nearby neighbours comparatively.

Obviously, all of Jackson's Landing are worried about the value of our
apartments in the wake of this announcement, but it it's not just
nimbyism. I understand that this is a working harbour, but, once JL
was built on this previously industrial land, thousands of residents
moved in and many will be greatly affected by this proposal. Real
estate agents are already noticing a downturn in prospective buyers
since it has been announced, and with an older demographic, a lot of
residents are counting on property values for their future.

The noise pollution this facility (and it's construction) will create
alone is worth the objection, especially in the wake of numerous ships
exceeding the noise recommendations of the EPA over recent years with
little or no repercussions for the offending vessels. It is not just
the noise these ships create themselves with their constant generator
humming, but the accompanying tug noise that rumbles through our
entire building when the ships arrive and depart, quite often aiming
their thrusters straight at us to get the ships aside, not to mention
the horns, bells and occasional sirens, which are NOT conducive to
sleep. The massive increase in ship and truck traffic, especially with
the horrendous proposed 24/7 operating hours, will invariably disrupt
the sleep of hundreds of residents, which can affect mood and
wellbeing at the least and cause actual illness at worst. The fact
that the trucks will be inside when loading and unloading means
nothing, as the trucks are loudest as they accelerate and decelerate
from the facility, and in using their air brakes over the ANZAC
bridge. The added noise will mean that those who enjoy days with the
doors open and that sleep with windows open will have to close them
and turn on their air conditioning, thus negating any "environmental
benefits" being claimed.

The addition of lighting over the site will impact sleep, also, for
those who don't have block-out blinds or the means to afford them.
Even though the lights will not supposedly be "aimed" to the south of
the facility, the ambient light will still affect us. With particulate
pollution, we notice the increase in the need to dust with the few
ships that unload currently, and, with the increased traffic of
possibly 50 to 100x more, this will undoubtedly increase
exponentially. Fuel oil emissions are a particular worry for people
with breathing issues, but for healthy people, as well.

There are those lucky few who can sleep through anything, but, with
the average age of the population of Jackson's Landing being a bit
older, most of us cannot. As a recovering cancer patient who needs
less stress, not more, I personally have a big issue with this whole
proposal, and I hope a better site can be found for this facility.

Sincerely,

Mrs Tennyson Logan
Pyrmont

My family and I live at Jacksons Landing, just across the water from
Glebe Island. We are already suffering from the noise from the ships
that from time to time arrive and stay for a few days at the time. The
noise is constant and it's very frustrating as we can't even keep our
balcony doors slightly open for fresh air during the evenings, and it
disrupts the sleep of our whole family (especially our two young
kids).

There are currently a number of buildings under construction around
Pyrmont at the moment, and the amount of dust that covers our balcony
on a daily basis is horrible. Where we could normally just open the
door to let our children out to play on the balcony floor, or sit down
for dinner on the balcony, is not possible now unless we first mop the
floor and wipe off all our outdoor furniture. Having a concrete
batching facility just across the water from our building would mean
dust 24/7, something that would damage our lifestyle that we have
invested a large sum of money to have. This facility would also mean a
great decrease in value of our property, which would be devastating
for our family.

On top of that, the air pollution associated with the boats, trucks
and potential concrete plant would be extremely damaging for us with
young children in the area that are already suffering from respiratory
issues related to the construction on Harris Street (which is
thankfully 'short-term'), combined with the air pollution coming from
Anzac Bridge which is also nearby. Imagining that those children would
on top of that also be forced to be exposed to air pollution from this
multi-user facility 24/7 365 days a year would be absolutely
devastating. We have a park just across from Glebe Island where our
kids often play, where we spend our weekends having BBQs. Please don't
do this to us.

I'm sure you're also aware that traffic on Anzac Bridge is already
clogged most days, and adding trucks coming in and out from Glebe
Island would put strain on the already challenging traffic conditions
and negatively affect many Sydneysiders traveling this direction for
work and schools every day.

Living in Pyrmont, we're part of the most densely populated suburb in
Australia, and the thought of us having to be subjected to not only
the air pollution from this proposed facility, but also the constant
noise and worsening traffic around our homes, that would be
heartbreaking for so many of us that love living in Pyrmont.

Please, please do NOT proceed with any plans for the multi-user
facility on Glebe Island!

Nigel Champion
7c 2 Bowman Street
Pyrmont NSW 2009

Ms Karl Fetterplace
Director
Department of Planning
GPO Box 39
Sydney 2001

9 May 2018

Dear Mr Fetterplace

RE: Hanson Concrete Plant Application for Glebe Island

I am writing as the owner of an apartment in the Evolve building at 7c
2 Bowman Street Pyrmont to express my strong opposition concerning the
application to build a concrete batching plant and bulk aggregate
facility on Glebe Island.

More specifically my concerns are:

1. Proximity: The Evolve apartment complex is only 250 metres from the
proposed site at Glebe Island Berth 1. The closeness of such a large
Concrete Plant will have a dramatic effect on the lifestyle of not
only the Evolve residents but the Jackson Landing Community as a
whole.
2. Air Pollution: We are already subjected to dust and pollution from
the Cruise Liners berthed at the White Bay Terminal and the occasional
ships that unload at Glebe Island Berth 1. The day after a ship is in
the vicinity of Jackson Landing we experience a thin layer of black
dust all over our outdoor furniture, veranda floor, balustrades etc.
With ships unloading 24/7 and only 250 metres from where we live the
black dust and other air pollutants will not only prevent us from
using our outdoor living space but it has the genuine potential of
adversely affecting our health. This is not something that can just
swept under the carpet - no pun intended - it is a truly genuine
concern.
3. Noise Pollution: Currently when a ship berths at Glebe Island Berth
1 we are exposed to increased noise levels which I am informed are
well above EPA night time noise limits. Increased noise levels not
only originate from the low rumbling, pulsating sounds from the ship
engines but also from the tug boats that assist in the berthing of the
ships. To move a huge aggregate bulk carrier into position it requires
incredible power from the tug boat engines. You would be surprised at
how loud the tugboats engines are when at full throttle - this is
tolerable on an occasional basis but not if it is happening 24/7. I
have also been reliably informed that that the Concrete Facility will
be operating 24/7 so the coming and going of thousands trucks each
week will exacerbate the noise pollution. The noise pollution added to
the air pollution is something that cannot be ignored.
4. Lighting: Currently when ships occasionally berth at Glebe Island
Berth 1 they are well lit which again is tolerable on an irregular
basis. However, with the ships and the concrete facility operating
24/7 and being only 250 metres from where we live the glare from the
artificial lighting will adversely affect how we sleep at night.

I have only raised four points as to why I am strongly opposed to the
Hanson Concrete Plant Application as I wanted to focus on the primary
ones that will have a detrimental effect on the health and wellbeing
of people living so close to the proposed development. I sincerely
hope you can take into consideration that such a development is not
about real estate values it is about quality of life.

In order that there is a level playing field I respectfully request
that Minister for Planning call in the Port Authority's proposed MUF
in order that the same assessment can be applied to the MUF as the
Hanson Concrete Plant

Sincerely



Nigel Champion

The application with its air, noise and light pollution and massive
traffic impact has too severe an impact on the surrounding area and
the residents who will be subject to these impacts 24/7. Have the
residents of Rozelle not been impacted enough with the constant threat
of WestConnex and the increasing noise and pollution risks from the
ever increasing traffic volumes carving through our homes?

Further to my Submission dated 8 May I would like to add that I request
the Planning Minister call the entire Glebe Island Development as a
SSD and that all reports be done on a cumulative basis. Reports should
be done on the combined effects of dust, noise, pollution, light,
traffic, water safety. This proposed development is ill conceived, ill
considered, not thought out. IT WILL DESTROY A COMMUNITY OF OVER
16,000 PEOPLE. STOP IT. FIND SOMEWHERE ELSE TO PUT IT. PORT BOTANY IS
THE IDEAL PLACE.

Further to my Submission dated 8 May I would like to add that I request
the Planning Minister call the entire Glebe Island Development as a
SSD and that all reports be done on a cumulative basis. Reports should
be done on the combined effects of dust, noise, pollution, light,
traffic, water safety. This proposed development is ill conceived, ill
considered, not thought out. IT WILL DESTROY A COMMUNITY OF OVER
16,000 PEOPLE. STOP IT. FIND SOMEWHERE ELSE TO PUT IT. PORT BOTANY IS
THE IDEAL PLACE.

I oppose the proposed batching plant at white bay as the proposal stands.
Sydney harbour has flourished as a beautiful amenity for families
across many LGA. Many home values - including my own, will be effected
should a 24/7 working port be authorised. I urge the realistic
consideration of all in the EIS, and I encourage the conclusion that
development of current locations is sufficient.
The following points are primary concerns for me, and my young family.

24/7 Operation and Noise

The facility will operate 24/7
Ships will be permitted to berth at the port 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week.
There are no bans on ships running generators while berthed or leaving
lights on at night.
Air quality

Ships delivering concrete and aggregate should be required to cover
their product so that particles do not become airborne at sea or in
the bay.
Ships should not be permitted to run their engines 24/7 because of the
negative impact this will have on air quality.
Shore to shop power should be mandatory.
Traffic

The application would add a significant number of trucks onto the
local road network including 189 vehicles in the AM peak hour and 98
in the PM peak hour.
The project should take into account the cumulative impact of truck
movements from a range of other projects proposed for the area
including the multi-user facility at Glebe Island, the Western Harbour
Tunnel and the staging site at White Bay Power Station.
Given these serious impacts, I ask that you refuse the application in
its current form and introduce strong controls to protect local
residents from noise, air pollution and traffic

24/7 Operation and Noise

The facility will operate 24/7
Ships will be permitted to berth at the port 24 hours a day 7 days a
week
There are no bans on ships running generators while berthed or leaving
lights on at night

Air quality

Ships delivering concrete and aggregate should be required to cover
their product so that particles do not become airborne at sea or in
the bay
Ships should not be permitted to run their engines 24/7 because of the
negative impact this will have on air quality
Shore to shop power should be mandatory

Traffic

The application would add a significant number of trucks onto the
local road network including 189 vehicles in the AM peak hour and 98
in the PM peak hour
The project should take into account the cumulative impact of truck
movements from a range of other projects proposed for the area
including the multi-user facility at Glebe Island, the Western Harbour
Tunnel and the staging site at White Bay Power Station

Given these serious impacts I ask that you refuse the application in
its current form and introduce strong controls to protect local
residents from noise, air pollution and traffic

If 1000,000 cubic metres of concrete from Hansons this is 167000 truck
movements per year and 20 per cent to go south or local as stated then
33400 truck movements minimum are heading up Johnston st or The
Crescent at Annandale or over the Anzac bridge. This is 643 per week
and we don't need it on top of Westconnex vehicles as they are
generally diesel and are polluters!

I strongly object to the proposals for Glebe Island --the Multi User
Facility, and the Hanson
Concrete Plant relocation.

My husband and I bought an apartment in this area believing it would
become a residential
haven. According to the Masterplan for Jacksons Landing in 2000, it
was to be a place of
renewed beauty along this foreshore after the local industries had
departed. I note the
relocation of the car carrier boats to Port Kembla from Glebe Island
as further evidence of
this.

Our experiences over the past eight or so years have been very
pleasant. The passing
pleasure craft, fishing fleet, the overseas terminal cruise liners,
tugs and the maritime
service fleet are a major plus, but it seems this 'interesting' peace
is about to be destroyed. I
am so alarmed at these two proposals. What consideration has there
been for the
thousands of residents now living in Jacksons Landing? We certainly
weren't expecting this.

Our health is a major concern! As much as you may try to eliminate
pollution from such
facilities, commonsense tells you it will never happen. Dust
particles, sulphur emissions
from the ships (above recommended levels), noise from the proposed
24/7 operations, light
from the ships and the plants, truck movement noise. It will destroy
this peaceful Bays
Precinct.

To have ships virtually alongside residential apartment buildings day
and night is an
appalling thought. As is the obvious marine difficulties that arise
with the restricted
entry/exit of craft from Blackwattle Bay beside these large vessels as
they manouver into
berths.

I am also concerned at the traffic flow on to the Crescent and on the
Anzac Bridge. Slow
loaded trucks are bound to disrupt travel here -- and it is already an
overloaded artery.
I hope you will seriously consider these points in evaluating the
proposals, and that the
dust, noise and light spill issues are fully comprehended. We need to
live peacefully, safely
and healthily in this environment.

To whom it may concern,

I am an 8 year old year 3 student and would like to express my
concerns about the
Glebe Island Hansons Construction proposal.

I have proof that the proposal from Hansons should not be approved.
There are
three main reasons why the Hansons warehouse should not be
constructed. These
reasons are that there would be too much noise from ship's engines
both day and
night, there would be too much dust and sand blown to us polluting the
environment
and us and there would be increased traffic.

To start off with, there would be too much noise from ship's engines.
Too make it
worse, the letters that have been sent to us have clearly said that
the warehouse will
be running 24/7!! This would surely effect me and my family's quality
of sleep! But
this would also be a problem in the day! As I mentioned earlier, I am
a year three
student and have homework to get done. The loud noise from the ship
will disrupt my
learning. I mean, would you like to be constantly hearing noise from
your house??

Next, I know that there will be a large amount of dust and sand blown
from the
warehouse. This would pollute not only us but also the environment.
Too much sand
would be a big problem for the environment. For dust, well this would
be polluting the
air. Especially on windy days would dust and sand be blown to our
houses and
around.

Finally, there would be increased traffic on the roads. I need to get
to school and my
family has things to do. I do not want to be late for school and I'm
not planning to be
late for anything else. From many of the Hanson trucks the traffic
will not be so good.
In conclusion, for the concerns I have expressed, I hope I have given
enough
reasons to why the Hanson warehouse should not be approved.

Dear Mr Fetterplace,

Glebe Island Aggregate Handling and Concrete Batching Facility (SSD
8544)
I live in and part−own an apartment in the building closest to
the proposed facility on Glebe Island
and will experience any adverse impacts resulting from its
construction and operation. I do not
object to Hansons relocating to Glebe Island from Blackwattle Bay
however, it do expect the facility to be constructed, and operate,
according to world's best practice. Generally, it makes sense to
locate the facility at a port as this enables raw materials to be
delivered by ship -- a much more environmentally sound form of
transport than road transport, and my partner and I bought our
property on the understanding that Glebe Island is a working port, and
will remain so for the foreseeable future, according to the Bays
Precinct Transformation Plan. The following are issues we would expect
to be addressed:

1.0 Shore to ship power supply --

I am aware that ships docked at Garden Island have recently
been adjusted to enable them to receive power from the adjacent port.
This has reduced
noise and air quality impacts on local residents. I support the
proposal to install a solar
power plant with battery storage on Glebe Island to provide clean
energy, not only to ships
moored at the concrete batching plant site, but to the adjacent
Multi−User Facility (MUF)
proposed to be installed by the Ports Authority at Glebe Island. The
cost of the installation
could be shared by potential users across the island.

2.0 Noise Impacts --

(a) Whilst the MUF will regularly operate over a 24 hour period, the
Hansons EIS
indicates that the maximum time required for materials discharge will
be 12 hours,
and the loading of concrete tankers will be infrequent late at night.
I therefore
propose that the operators take every step to ensure that unloading of
ships occurs
during the hours of 7am to 7pnn, avoiding late night operations.

(b) The EIS has taken impact measurements from points in Pyrmont, but
not from the
residential building closest to the proposed facility --2 Bowman
Street. I ask that
before the assessment of this DA is finalised, Hansons be required to
take, and
project measurements from this building as it will be the worst
affected within the
noise catchment.

(c) Cumulative noise impacts should include those associated with the
construction of
WestConnex and the Metro at White Bay. I am not convinced by the
assertion that
PCU074528PCU074528
when WestConnex is fully operational traffic noise in the area around
the Bays
Precinct will be within acceptable limits, especially as additional
traffic will be
disgorged from WestConnex on to the Anzac Bridge.

2.0 Air Quality --

(a) I am not convinced that measurements of baseline air quality taken
from a
monitoring station in Rozelle have relevance to the conditions
prevailing close to the
facility in Pyrmont. Having lived at 2 Bowman Street for nearly 10
years, I know that
strong winds prevail in its vicinity many days of the year, and, with
extreme weather
conditions emanating from climate change, are likely to become more
extreme.
Before approving this DA, Hansons should be required to install a
monitoring station
in Pyrmont, close to Glebe Island to collect more relevant baseline AQ
data.

(b) Residents in Ba!main suffered from unpleasant sulphur odours for a
number of years
before stricter standards were imposed on the cruise ship operators.
Hansons
should be required to ensure that sulphur emissions operate to the
same or better
standards as at the White Bay CPT.

(c) I note that Hansons will investigate the future installation of a
pipeline through
which to transport cement from the silos operated by Cement Australia
at Glebe
Island to the Hansons silos. In the meantime cement will be loaded on
trucks at one
side of the island, driven to the batch plant, then unloaded into the
silos at the
Hansons facility. I urge the Department to require Hansons to install
this pipeline at
the same time as the construction of the facility, not some time in
the distant future.
This is a far more efficient method of transport, and will result in
reduced risk of
dust emissions.

3.0 Traffic and Transport--
As someone who uses the car to get to and from work, I can advise
that traffic in and around the Pyrmont interchange is worsening in
peak hours. I am
concerned that even though the aggregate delivery trucks will not be
using the local roads,
the use of the Anzac Bridge by agitator trucks will only increase the
Level of Service at a
number of Pyrmont intersections, already often at a standstill
especially during the evening
peak hour. I note that the EIS also notes that the LOS will be
operating beyond its current
capacity by 2029 and, in my view, won't be ameliorated by the opening
of WestConnex
which will be disgorging increased traffic on to the Anzac Bridge and
the Crescent in
Annandale when it opens. History demonstrates that additional
motorways soon become
carparks in peak hours. The cumulative impact of the traffic
engendered by the Hansons
plant, the MUF, the construction of WestConnex and the Metro at
Rozelle/White Bay, not to
mention that associated with the new Fish Market and the development
of the current Fish
Market site, is not fully explained in the EIS. I urge the Department
of Planning to require
studies to be undertaken at intersections beyond the immediate site
catchment -- at Victoria
Road/Roberts St, Harris Street/Pyrmont Bridge Road, and Pyrmont Bridge
Road/Bank Street
and Wattle Street and advise the community of the likely cumulative
impacts of the
foreshadowed developments. It would also be appreciated if additional
public transport could be provided to Pyrmont/Ultimo and White
Bay/Glebe Island to meet both current and future demand by residents
and workers.

4.0 Visual Amenity--
There is no doubt that the construction of the batching plant and the
MUF
will change the views from a number of apartment buildings and parks
in Pyrmont. I am not
concerned about these changes and personally find the movement of
ships in and out of
port interesting. But as others have differing levels of concern, I
would encourage maximum
community consultation during the detailed design phase, including the
Public Art Strategy
and the urban and landscape Masterplan for the site.
Of more concern is the prospect of increased light pollution at night.
Our apartment, which
is very close to Glebe Island already suffers from high ambient
lighting at night and I would
expect consultation with affected apartment owners when the detailed
lighting plan is being
developed. I believe that both Hansons and the Ports Authority have
outlined strategies to reduce and, possibly, prevent adverse impacts
on the residents, workers and visitors of Pyrmont but more work needs
to be done to minimise them further, including shore to ship power
supply, as I believe the operation of the ships when docked is likely
to be the main source of noise and pollution to affect Pyrmont
residents.