Glebe Island Concrete Batching Plant and Aggregate Handling Facility

Dear Mr Lusher,

I would like to raise my strong disagreement regarding proposed new
"The Hanson Concrete Plant Construction" in the Glebe Island.

Application number: SSD 8544.
Location: 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

Proposed site is unsafe and unfriendly for the local community, in
particular for the residents in the Evolve building.

1. Having an industrial site just meters away from residential area
with playing grounds and green parks, will contradict the cultural,
recreational and residential profile of the Glebe Island (2000 Master
Plan). Therefore, the proposed site is simply unsuitable for
accommodating an industrial plant.

2. Industrial site next to the residential area means ongoing noise
and lights coming from the boats and trucks. Unpleasant scenario for
anyone.

3. There are going to be long and short term environmental
consequences. Dust and pollution emitted from the factory will
jeopardise water quality near the Glebe Island.

4. Accumulative harmful effects on the residents' health. Residents
who already have serious respiratory and other chronic health
conditions, will be affected the most. In particular, dust is of
concern, that can escape the so called "safety traps" installed by the
factory. People will be put under strenuous conditions, as relocation
into a new suburb with cleaner air will become suddenly very relevant.

Therefore, I would appreciate, if those in government responsible for
city planning, consider our concerns regarding above mentioned pending
construction. I would welcome further discussions for a new location.

Thank you in advance

12/05/2018
Mr Boris Trochine
10D/2 Bowman st, Pyrmont, NSW 2009

Mr Ben Lusher Director
Key Site Assessments Planning Services,
Department of Planning and Environment,
GPO Box 39 SYDNEY 2001


Dear Mr Lusher,

This is to express my concerns regarding recent application by the
"Hanson Construction Pty Ltd" to build a new factory site in the Glebe
Island.

Application number: SSD 8544.
Location: 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

My family and I are strongly against this proposal, as the site of the
proposed new building is not sustainable for the local population.

Glebe Island is only hundreds of meters way from our Evolve building,
which makes this site not suitable for a concrete factory. In
particular:

1. Dust -this can cause serious lung and general respiratory system
health problems, including a severe risk for those who has already an
asthma. Factory representatives might argue that all protective
measures will be taken place to minimize dust exposure to the locals,
nevertheless I would like to underline that particles at certain size
will be exposed anyway due to the winds during shipments. These
particles can also cause cancer and metabolic disorders. Air pollution
is a major problem in many developing countries, including China. We
would not want to see Sydney as a city in a developed nation going
backward and leave us and our children with health problems to solve.
2. Water pollution at the Glebe Island. We all are these days fighting
against environmental pollution. So many boats are already passing
through the Glebe Island causing huge water pollution. Given the fact
that the new building is going to be on the water, this is a huge
problem to the water, fish etc.
3. Noise, lights-The port is already quite heavily engaged in
anchoring many boats on weekly and monthly schedule. This can not
simply go unnoticed as all the residents at Evolve witness the noise
and lights coming from the boats at night. They disturb our normal
livelihood. Nevertheless, we never complaint. Now, with the new
company the number of the boats is not going to double or triple, but
ten times or more.
4. Unwanted boat accidents- Huge number of vessels will inevitably
result into possible accidents.

In my opinion, this is a serious violation of our rights for a clean,
normal and civilised livelihood. Why we have to pay the harsh cost of
failing health because of the dust and air pollution?

Therefore, my family ad I are strongly against this "unrealistic" and
"backward" proposal. We would encourage government to search for
another site for the construction. We oppose the proposal in its
current form, as the location is unsafe and unsuitable.

I have to also inform that I don't belong to the any political party
and don't have any political preferences.

Boris Trochine

I have recently purchased a residential property in Hyam Street, Balmain.
Shortly after purchasing this property I was made aware of the
proposed concrete batching plant. Like many of the tens of thousands
of residents in the immediate (and I do mean immediate, being
approximately 200 metres as the crow flows) surrounding area, I object
to this proposal on the following grounds:
* Noise from proposed 24-hour, seven day a week operating time.
Balmain is an extremely quiet (and again I reiterate "residential"
area). Having a facility run 24 hours a day will have a massive impact
on residents' quiet enjoyment.
* Environment impact. There will be dust particles from the proposed
operation, which will become airborne and affect those residents with
respiratory issues such as asthma. Continuous running of ships'
engines will further impact this (both from an air quality and noise
perspective).
* Traffic. Traffic across the Anzac Bridge is above capacity at the
best of times. Adding additional truck movements will further
exacerbate this problem.
Glebe Island was originally designated for Google headquarters, and an
operation such as this is a far more appropriate use for Glebe Island.
To propose such a heavily industrial type operation in such close
proximity to a high density residential suburb is inappropriate when
there are other more appropriate alternatives.

I have lived in Balmain for seven years and I object to this proposal on
the following grounds:
* Noise from proposed 24-hour, seven day a week operating time.
Balmain is an extremely quiet residential area. Having a facility run
24 hours a day will have a massive impact on residents' quiet
enjoyment.
* Environment impact. There will be dust particles from the proposed
operation, which will become airborne and affect those residents with
respiratory issues such as asthma. Continuous running of ships'
engines will further impact this (both from an air quality and noise
perspective).
* Traffic. Traffic across the Anzac Bridge is above capacity at the
best of times. Adding additional truck movements will further
exacerbate this problem.
Glebe Island was originally designated for Google headquarters, and an
operation such as this is a far more appropriate use for Glebe Island.
To propose such a heavily industrial type operation in such close
proximity to a high density residential suburb is inappropriate when
there are other more appropriate alternatives.

I consider the placement of the Hanson concrete site with ship to shore
delivery of aggregate material and multiple trucks moving the concrete
produced on site in all directions on local roads planned for the next
30 years, is poor decision making. The site is surrounded by private
housing now and further high density apartment blocks are proposed in
all the areas near this foreshore activity. The noise will continue
24/7. The aesthetics of the ANZAC Bridge will be desecrated by this
monstrosity on the horizon. The road system will be overloaded with
trucks. All happening in the densely populated inner city suburbs of
Balmain, Pyrmont, Ultimo, Glebe, Annandale and Rozelle. We are not
opposed to a working harbour but not an indusrial nightmare that
should be placed in an industrial site. The work required on the
Heritage Fleet and Tall Ships that need constant repair is being
ignored while an ugly concrete industry is trying to grab land for a
much longer period than necessary. Say NO to this long term miss-use
of our inner Sydney Harbour foreshore. Go to Botany Bay to an
industrial site for this type of activity.

13 May 2018
Minister for Planning Planning Services Department of Planning and
Environment, GPO Box 39 Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Minister for Planning,
Re Application No SSD 8544.Berth1 and land adjacent, Glebe Island,
James Craig Road, Roselle (lot 10 DP 11 707 10)
Applicant Hanson Construction Materials Pty Limited
Council Area Inner West
Consent Authority- Minister for Planning
As a resident of Pyrmont, I do NOT support the application. Glebe
Island is now located within an environmentally sensitive area with
large numbers of people affected by activities on the site. It is only
250 metres away from the high-rise apartment buildings on Jones Bay.
Any proposed upscaling of activities within the Glebe Island precinct
(which have been significantly scaled back over the past decade
allowing extensive residential development along the Pyrmont
Peninsula) needs to consider in the light of Pyrmont now being
Australia's most densely populated neighbourhood. The NSW Planning &
Environment Department" web site state they exist to "make people's
lives better by making NSW a great place to live and work. We help to
provide homes and services, build great communities, create jobs and
protect the environment".
2

The proposed Hanson Concrete Batching and Aggregate Handling Plant and
the Multi Use Facility ("MUF") being proposed on the site by the Port
Authority are NOT in keeping with this stated objective and will
certainly not make the lives of the residents of Pyrmont BETTER! How
can it given the proposal will be subjecting residents to among other
things? * Intolerable continuous noise levels from 24/7 operations of
the batching plant and the proposed MUF * Large increases in truck
movements and noise from trucks reversing 24/7 * Sleep disruption and
the resultant public health consequences of artificial port lighting *
Safety impacts in relation to existing marine traffic on an
increasingly congested Johnsons Bay waterway which will only increase
with the redevelopment of the Pyrmont Fish Markets into a world Class
facility, and * multiple ships continuously running engines creating
entirely new levels of noise and airborne contaminants. Further the
Bays Precinct is a State Significant precinct and included within the
Glebe Island and White Bay Master Plan 2000 and the Bays
Transformation Plan 2015. Mike Baird as Premier of NSW stated (less
than two years ago) the NSW Government's ambition for the Bays
Precinct is to drive an internationally competitive economy building
world class destinations on Sydney Harbour that will transform the
City, NSW and Australia. The proposed usage of the site by Hanson and
The Port Authority are certainly not in keeping with this stated
objective. The proposals by Hanson (concrete batching plant) and the
Port Authority (MUF) for use of the site if approved is returning
Pyrmont to the industrial landscape it occupied 30/40 years ago. This
was appropriate then given the precinct was an industrial landscape
with little or no residential precincts. Today it is a residential
precinct and is Australia's most densely populated neighbourhood.
Residents accept the need to retain a level of working harbour.
However, the Hanson Glebe Island Proposal and the planned Multi Use
Facility that the Port Authority is proposing needs to be considered
having regard to the significant change in the landscape of the Bays
Precinct. The industrial activities of Pyrmont have, over the last two
decades, been replaced with residential communities. The working
harbour at Glebe Island going forward needs to recognise and address
this change.
3

Do you want to be remembered as the Minister for Planning responsible
for overseeing the return to eyesore, dirty, ugly industrial buildings
and activities dumping high level pollution of all types on the
residents of Australia's most densely populated neighborhood on the
foreshores of the most beautiful harbor in the world.? I am aware of
several very detailed objections lodged by several of my fellow
residents. Accordingly, I do not intend to include any further
detailed analysis nor lengthy detailed reasons for my objection.
All residents have similar concerns.
I confirm I have made no reportable political donations.

Minister for Planning Planning Services Department of Planning and
Environment, GPO Box 39 Sydney NSW 2001
Dear Minister for Planning,
Re Application No SSD 8544.Berth1 and land adjacent, Glebe Island,
James Craig Road, Roselle (lot 10 DP 11 707 10)
Applicant Hanson Construction Materials Pty Limited
Council Area Inner West
Consent Authority- Minister for Planning
As a resident of Pyrmont, I do NOT support the application. Glebe
Island is now located within an environmentally sensitive area with
large numbers of people affected by activities on the site. It is only
250 metres away from the high-rise apartment buildings on Jones Bay.
Any proposed upscaling of activities within the Glebe Island precinct
(which have been significantly scaled back over the past decade
allowing extensive residential development along the Pyrmont
Peninsula) needs to consider in the light of Pyrmont now being
Australia's most densely populated neighbourhood. The NSW Planning &
Environment Department" web site state they exist to "make people's
lives better by making NSW a great place to live and work. We help to
provide homes and services, build great communities, create jobs and
protect the environment".
2

The proposed Hanson Concrete Batching and Aggregate Handling Plant and
the Multi Use Facility ("MUF") being proposed on the site by the Port
Authority are NOT in keeping with this stated objective and will
certainly not make the lives of the residents of Pyrmont BETTER! How
can it given the proposal will be subjecting residents to among other
things? * Intolerable continuous noise levels from 24/7 operations of
the batching plant and the proposed MUF * Large increases in truck
movements and noise from trucks reversing 24/7 * Sleep disruption and
the resultant public health consequences of artificial port lighting *
Safety impacts in relation to existing marine traffic on an
increasingly congested Johnsons Bay waterway which will only increase
with the redevelopment of the Pyrmont Fish Markets into a world Class
facility, and * multiple ships continuously running engines creating
entirely new levels of noise and airborne contaminants. Further the
Bays Precinct is a State Significant precinct and included within the
Glebe Island and White Bay Master Plan 2000 and the Bays
Transformation Plan 2015. Mike Baird as Premier of NSW stated (less
than two years ago) the NSW Government's ambition for the Bays
Precinct is to drive an internationally competitive economy building
world class destinations on Sydney Harbour that will transform the
City, NSW and Australia. The proposed usage of the site by Hanson and
The Port Authority are certainly not in keeping with this stated
objective. The proposals by Hanson (concrete batching plant) and the
Port Authority (MUF) for use of the site if approved is returning
Pyrmont to the industrial landscape it occupied 30/40 years ago. This
was appropriate then given the precinct was an industrial landscape
with little or no residential precincts. Today it is a residential
precinct and is Australia's most densely populated neighbourhood.
Residents accept the need to retain a level of working harbour.
However, the Hanson Glebe Island Proposal and the planned Multi Use
Facility that the Port Authority is proposing needs to be considered
having regard to the significant change in the landscape of the Bays
Precinct. The industrial activities of Pyrmont have, over the last two
decades, been replaced with residential communities. The working
harbour at Glebe Island going forward needs to recognise and address
this change.
3

Do you want to be remembered as the Minister for Planning responsible
for overseeing the return to eyesore, dirty, ugly industrial buildings
and activities dumping high level pollution of all types on the
residents of Australia's most densely populated neighborhood on the
foreshores of the most beautiful harbor in the world.? I am aware of
several very detailed objections lodged by several of my fellow
residents. Accordingly, I do not intend to include any further
detailed analysis nor lengthy detailed reasons for my objection.
All residents have similar concerns.
I confirm I have made no reportable political donations.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide my views on this proposal. As a
resident of Pyrmont, my apartment looks directly over Glebe Island,
the proposed venue for this development.

I purposely chose to purchase in Pyrmont due to the quietness of the
location. I am concerned that given the proposed development will be
able to operate 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, my primary reason for
choosing to live here will be compromised as it will definitely create
noise that currently does not exist.

I also suffer from asthma, and am concerned that the core purpose of
this development - concrete batching - may have an adverse effect on
my health.

Finally, I am concerned that this development will impact directly on
my right to open my windows without having to put up with the type of
noise that this development will generate. This, combined with the
above, is likely to have a significant impact on my quality of life. I
would also imagine that this development will have a negative effect
on the value of properties in this area, but my main concern relates
to the above mentioned points - ie quality of life.

I were shocked when I heard the proposal to build a Cement factory on
Glebe Island because it will totally destroyed my life at Evovle.

1. Noise and vibration from plant,trucks, ship make our environment
change to busy Industrial Port, and most importantly it's just 30
Meters away from my apartment.

2. Dust from trucks,ships will severely influence our health,
especially our lungs.

3. 24 hours operation totally destroys our residential life .

4. New facility will change people's life and devalue the properties
in Pyrmont community , especially sharply devalue my apartment in
Evovle .

I want to ask what's the initial purpose of our government to develop
Pyrmont from demolished industrial area to residential one. After the
residential community successfully built after 18 years, this proposal
will change Pyrmont community back to industrial one and it's
absolutely not against the initial purpose of building new Pyrmont.
The government should not only consider economic interests but also
people's life and health .To Maintain and improve the living
environment should be the government `s goal but not economic interest
especially when any proposal sacrificing people's health.

Besides, I never see Industrial facility in very down town in any
other big cities in the world . Only in Sydney we could see concrete
plant in Glebe , a very important place on the other side of harbour
bridge. Sydney is always regarded as big international city but these
cement factory or proposal of building multi-user facility are pulling
a modern city to a outdated industrial city of early last century.

If this proposal passed , that will make me very depressed and I will
be forced to see both psychological and physical doctors.I'm planning
to live at my apartment for rest of my life, but it will totally
destroy my dream if this proposal passed.

I approve the overall submission as an employee of Hanson and also a
local constituent.

This development will be very important to the areas growth and also
the amount of truck movements it will take of the roads. Also moving
the plant to a much more isolated area.

It is also a benefit to the many Hanson local workers to further their
employment in the area by creating jobs and securing their futures.

Hi There
I am writing to strongly object to the proposed Concrete batching
plant at Glebe Island. I fail to understand how in the most populace
area of Australia anyone can think that building a noisy, dusty and
highly industrialised complex is ok. In this area there are parks,
water amenities, walking tracks and to inject a great big eyesore and
environmental disaster waiting to happen is just a nonsense. This is
just another example of unscrupulous behaviour and a blinkered short
term approach to the good of the local area.
I have an engineering background and understand just how much noise
and dust will be created by this facility. The fact that the
consultation process has been so clandestine is also of great concern
to me.
I am also strongly opposed to the proposed 24 hour operation of this
facility. Additional truck noise will only further exacerbate an
already congested area. Your claims that noise air pollution and light
impacts will be minimal are not convincing, considering that at the
moment the cement ships at glebe island emit high noises, light and
toxic diesel exhaust.
Could you please delay this project until a comprehensive master plan
has been developed AND the plan has been presented to the public for
feedback and discussion. One week to review something of this size
does not cut it.
Regards
Bert Rodenburg 0424469454

Concrete Batching Plant, Glebe Island

My family and I are local residents living within close proximity to
Glebe Island.
We object to the proposed aggregate handling and concrete facility
with shipping terminal at Glebe Island.

The proposal represents a significant intensification of industrial
activities within a precinct that the Government has allowed to become
largely residential.

We are very concerned about:
* the noise,
* the air pollutants
* night-time light,
* and adverse visual impacts of this project.

We currently struggle to cope with the emissions of noise, dust, toxic
diesel fumes and particulates, along with high powered industrial
lighting currently generated by port operations at Glebe Island berths
7 & 8. We feel the current proposal will tip the balance to make the
quality of life here untenable and we are very very fearful.

There appears to be no current assessment on the cumulative
environmental impacts that this project will have for local residents
(i.e. combined impact with current operations). Data used in the
current application appears to be very old.
The technical figures, predictions and claims on dust, pollution,
noise and lighting are very complex and it is impossible for local
residents to understand how the figures were derived or interpret what
they mean in terms of everyday impacts. How do we get any confidence
that the appropriate modeling has been used, with little information
provided on how figures were determined.

Further there are a number of major industrial projects planned for
adjacent areas. We would like to know the combined environmental
impact analysis of all the projects currently being considered in the
Glebe Island and White Bay precinct. These include:

* Current Hanson proposal for Concrete Batching Plant
* Glebe Island Multi User Facility
* West Connex storage and marshalling Yard at White Bay Power Station
* Western Harbour Tunnel Construction Site at White Bay.

Each of these projects are planning to operate 24 x 7 and each of
these proposals will have significant environmental impacts for us
local residents who live and breathe next door to them 24 x 7.

The community has repeatedly been promised a holistic vision for the
precinct that sets the future direction of development and land use,
while protecting existing residential amenity.

A strategic vision has not been delivered by Government, yet new
developments like this continue to be proposed in an ad hoc nature.
This piecemeal approach should not be permitted. A master plan for the
precinct should be completed before any proposed development is
approved.

Please consider these objections and think about how would you feel if
this was being proposed in your back yard, or the backyard of your
Mum, Dad, or children.

I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to the above proposal.
My objections relate primarily to the impact of the proposal on
heritage, aesthetics and the despoliation of the scenic views from the
Bays. As a resident of Glebe, I am alarmed at the prospect of these
changes imposed for a commercial interest.

This proposal represents a reversion to the early 20thC industrial
past of the Inner West area and will impose a significant loss of
visual amenity with no public benefit. The proposal appears
opportunistic and without proper regard for the strategic development
of the White Bay area which should be undertaken in consultation with
the community. Such strategic development must not compromise the
essence and beauty of existing structures.

Ugly gateway : The proposed facility will blight the entrance to
Rozelle and Blackwattle Bays (and, by extension, the Sydney Fish
Markets). Suggested mitigation measures and/or public art in an
attempt to reduce perceptions of size and/or ugliness, are simply
"lipstick on the pig" and as such are an affront. They are in fact a
recognition of just how inappropriate this structure would be, in this
setting.

Glebe Island Bridge : The proposed facility, because of its relatively
close location, would disrespect, diminish and detract from the Glebe
Island bridge and its ramparts, all of which are included in the State
Heritage Register listing. The failures of RMS to properly restore and
maintain this bridge should in no way be seen as a measure of how
greatly it is valued by historians, heritage experts, civil engineers
and the community.

Anzac Bridge : Having given Sydney a monumental, handsome and
much-admired bridge, it would appear that our city-shapers may be in
danger of dispensing with issues of curtilage and aesthetics if this
subject proposal is allowed to go forward. The proposed facility will
significantly muddle and complicate the sightlines from the west of
the soaring deck of the Anzac Bridge (1995) with its middle-distance
views of the Pyrmont Peninsula and far-distant views of the lower
North Shore. Further, viewers will be challenged in being able to
properly "read" the geometry of the elegant pylons which support the
bridge structure.

Impact on "receivers" : Whilst the documentation supporting the
proposal acknowledges the huge number of pedestrians and cyclists on
the Glebe Foreshore Walk, perhaps neither proponent or assessors quite
understand the significance of the relatively unfettered view of the
three bridges (Anzac, Glebe Island and Sydney Harbour) which greets
the viewer arriving from the northern end of Glebe Point Road. Many
first-time viewers are utterly transfixed by the sight. Other
"receivers" include tourist groups, bridge aficionados, painters, many
amateur and serious photographers, picnickers, film crews and those
simply seeking solace.

The proposed concrete batch plant should be moved to a location where
it does not jeopardise the integrity, curtilage or aesthetics of these
engineering masterpieces.

John Holgate
Burradoo NSW 2576

13 May 2018

The Hon. Anthony Roberts MP
Minister for Planning
Planning Services
Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney 2001

Dear Minister,

I own a property at Jackson's Landing in Pyrmont and I strongly object
to the proposed Hanson's Concrete Plant on Glebe Island, Ref: SSD
17_8544 - GIB1 & Land adjacent, Glebe Island, James Craig Rd, Rozelle
(lot 10 DP 11 707 10).

This proposal is not a suitable location for this development and
should not be allowed to proceed, for the following reasons:

1. The proposed 24/7 operation amenity at Glebe Island and the ships
berthed at GIB1, would create and emit a significant amount of
unacceptable noise, light, water and air pollution. Based on
documented evidence of ship operations, the noise emissions from ships
will be worse than predicted in the EIS.

2. The proposed development will have a negative impact on the area,
through severe traffic congestion. This will be created by the high
number of trucks servicing the offloading of building materials at
Glebe Island.

3. The proposed development does not align with the overall objectives
and principles of the 2000 Master Plan for White Bay and Glebe Island.

4. The proposed skyline at Glebe Island, will have an extremely
negative visual impact for all local residents and visitors. It will
be a real eyesore for anyone viewing the proposed structures at Glebe
Island, from any of the many public waterfront vantage points and
residential properties.

In closing, I would like to add that in 2010, when I purchased my
apartment off the plan at Jackson's Landing, it was the combination of
quality water views and recreational life style that I was investing
in. The extensive pathways and parklands incorporated in this
waterfront precinct, offered residents the opportunity to recreate and
enjoy a high standard of living, right on the CBD fringe. If there
been any inkling of a plan for 24/7 heavy industry, being placed on
Glebe Island, I simply would not have purchased the apartment.

Yours sincerely,
John Holgate

Dear Sir or Madam, I ask you to reject the application for the concrete
batching plant on Glebe Island due to its significance and health and
environmental impacts.

This location is entirely unsuitable for such an operation and,
surprising it is being considered as it s an extremely densely
populated location, with Pyrmont, Balmain and White Bay neighbouring
it and these foreshores have tightly-packed, multilevel apartment
complexes. The number of people that will be affected by these works
and the nature of the works need to be considered, as they clearly
haven't been.

The excessive and ongoing nature of the noise, light and pollution of
the 24/7 operations, as well as the berthing of ships and their
generators running, emitting fumes as well as the negative impact on
the air quality is all of real concern to the residents of the area.

The operations, dealing with concrete in large quantities, are also an
issue as concrete is carcinogenic and not able to be controlled
adequately as the particles become airborne, leading to lung disease
and other serious health implications.

Also how is the operation going to be managed will it pollute our at
last clean harbour?

In terms of traffic and truck movements this application needs to be
scrutinised and judged in connection with the projects it is connected
to ( the multi-user facility at Glebe Island, the Western Harbour
Tunnel and the staging site at White Bay Power Station)
and please consider how all of these together will affect traffic, the
lives and health of the surrounding residents as well as the
environment.

I am writing to express my objection to the development application
submitted by Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd, for the Glebe
Island Aggregate Handling and Concrete Batching Facility (SSD 8544).

The proposed batching plant is located 150m from my apartment building
at 2 Bowman Street, Pyrmont. Activity related to the proposed batching
plant will have significant adverse impacts on my family's quality of
life as nearby residents. We are very anxious about our health and
wellbeing. The following trouble us immensely; all of which are
hazards introduced by the proposed development:

1) Noise pollution, particularly where levels are above EPA limits;


2) Air pollution, primarily the sulphur-laden exhaust from cargo ships
and other machinery working in the area;


3) Dust pollution, which may contain toxic particulate matter;


4) Light pollution, and its impact on our quality of sleep; and


5) Road traffic, specifically the 3500 new truck movements that will
choke our already congested local streets.


Please do not allow this submitted development application to progress
any further, without stringent review of the above hazards. No one
deserves to have these health risks introduced to their otherwise safe
and happy living arrangements. I sincerely hope that the NSW
Government, and the Department of Planning and Environment, will
respect the health and safety of families in Pyrmont.


Kind Regards,

Dr Martin Sterba PhD FCICM EDIC

I write to object to the proposed aggregate handling and concrete
facility with shipping terminal at
Glebe Island. In its current form, the proposal represents a
significant intensification of industrial
activities within a precinct that has become largely residential. If
unchanged, together with the
multi-user facility proposed adjacent to the site, the facility would
have significant impacts on
adjacent communities.
There is general support for Glebe Island to retain some level of
working harbour and recognition
among surrounding communities that the region will always have a
working harbour presence.
However, this part of the harbour has changed significantly over the
last two decades under
successive state and local government urban renewal policies. The
industrial purposes of Pyrmont
have been replaced with residential communities and further
development has been earmarked
including on the current Sydney Fish Market site, which is to be moved
to the existing Hanson
concrete handling site. The working harbour at Glebe Island has been
significantly scaled back
over the last decade allowing extensive residential development along
the Pyrmont peninsula.
Pyrmont has become Australia's most densely populated neighbourhood.
Glebe Island is now located within an environmentally sensitive area,
with large numbers of people
potentially affected by activities on the site. It is only 200 to 250
metres away from the high rise
apartment buildings along Jacksons Landing and Bowman Street. The
proposed port must
respond to this current setting.
I am concerned that the current proposal fails to address this context
and would result in
serious impacts on existing and future Pyrmont residents.
Planning Process
Glebe Island sits within the Bays Precinct, which has been the subject
of extensive work with
stakeholders and residents for over a decade. The community has
repeatedly been promised a
holistic vision for the precinct that sets the future direction of
development and land use, while
protecting existing residential amenity. A strategic vision has not
been finalised, yet new
developments continue to be proposed in an ad hoc nature. This
piecemeal approach will not
result in the best public outcome for the region. A master plan for
the precinct should be
completed before any proposed development is approved.
Reports in the development application include complex technical
figures, predictions and claims
on dust, pollution, noise and lighting. Most people in the community
do not have the expertise to
understand how figures were derived or interpret what they mean in
terms of impacts. It is
difficult to know if the appropriate modelling has been used, with
little information provided
on how figures were determined.

The Manager
Planning and Environment
Dear Sir/Madam
I wish to object to the proposals for the 24/7 operation of Hanson's
concrete batching plant on Glebe Island - my comments are as follows:
* Continuous operation - currently the residents of Glebe in Ferry
Road and other streets on the eastern side of Glebe Point Road are
subject to noise from the operation of the batching plant in Bridge
Road. The low frequency noise is particularly annoying and Hanson have
at times not obeyed the restrictions on ceasing noise making
operations by 7:00 pm (and it appears that they have not been fined by
the City of Sydney for their noise pollution). Given the thousands of
residents who will be affected by the noise from Hanson's operation on
Glebe Island and at times the company's non-compliance with existing
noise requirements, the operation of the batching plant must be
restricted to day time operation (7:00 am to 6:00 pm) only on Monday
to Friday.
* Shipping -the use of ships to deliver materials for the batching
plant should be encouraged as it will result in fewer truck movements
along the already congested local roads. From experience with the
overseas passenger terminal in Balmain it is essential that the ships
be connected to a land-based electricity source so that their engines,
which are a massive source of air pollution, are not running
continuously to provide power. Further to reduce noise pollution, the
unloading of materials should also be restricted to day time hours
(7:00 am to 6:00 pm), Monday to Friday.

Yours faithfully,
Andrew Wood

Dear Sir/Madam,

I do not believe a concrete mixing plant should be moved so close to a
residential area. Moving it away from Pyrmont Bridge Road is
understood but currently it is not close to any substantial
residential area. There are plenty of major commercial harbour areas
that would be much more appropriate.

Any commercial activity so close to a residential area needs strict
operating conditions in regards to pollution (especially dust from the
concrete in this case), noise (24x7 operations will be very
disruptive, including ship movements), lighting (bright operating
lights will disturb surrounding residents).

Traffic impacts will also be significant. The roads are essentially at
peak capacity already and introducing 100 to 200 big trucks during
morning and evening peak hours will have a very large detrimental
impact on road congestion. And if the proposed multi-use facility also
goes ahead adding another 1,200 trucks per day, the roads will become
impassable.

For these reasons I object to this proposal and believe far better
uses can be made of Glebe Island.

Proposed Hanson Concrete Batching Plant, Glebe Island SSD 17_8544

I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to the above
proposal, as I believe it will significantly impact on heritage,
aesthetics and scenic views from the Inner West bays. It represents a
significant intensification of industrial activities within an area
that is now largely residential - in other words, it's a step back in
time to the Inner West's early 20th century industrial past.

This is an area that, at significant cost, has been `cleaned up' and
enhanced by the Glebe Foreshore walkway. Literally hundreds of
residents and tourists walk and cycle on these paths on a daily basis.
They can be seen enjoying and photographing the beautiful Anzac
Bridge, the Glebe Bridge and the Harbour Bridge.

The proposed Concrete Batching Plant should be moved to a location
where it does not jeopardise the integrity, curtilage or aesthetics of
these engineering masterpieces. It is simply not appropriate to build
structures that result in significant loss of visual amenity with no
public benefit.