Glebe Island Concrete Batching Plant and Aggregate Handling Facility

Please find objection attached

Please see attached letter.

/Users/christopherlevy/Desktop/20180501 CDL objections to EIS final.pdf

/Users/christopherlevy/Desktop/20180501 CDL objections to EIS final.pdf

Attached

Please see attached

I strongly object to the following proposed industrial installation on
Glebe Island by Hanson Concrete with its concrete batching plant.

My reasons are:
1. The proposal is both contrary to the 2015 Bays Precinct
Transformation Plan.
2. Earlier planning for Glebe Island was for an `innovation precinct'.
These proposals are clearly contrary to that.
3. The proposed 24/7 works on the island would be a mere 150-200
metres across the water from major Jackson's Landing dwellings, part
of the most densely populated suburb in Australia.
4. This means that thousands of residents will have their daily
lifestyle disturbed 24/7 and particularly their SLEEP AT NIGHT caused
by:
* Noise from unloading of the ships;
* Noise from the Glebe Island operation itself;
* Noise from the movements of trucks receiving the ships' cargo;
* Noise from the ships' constant engines and generators, even when not
unloading. This is of HUGE concern at night time during sleeping
times;
* Industrial flood lighting of Glebe Island to facilitate off-loading
of ships' cargo and on-land operations at night will seriously
interfere with the sleep in hundreds of neighbouring apartments and
thousands of residents.

5. Ship noise cannot be controlled by Hanson.
6. Apparently shore to ship power is out of the question so ship
generators would operate 24/7.
7. Sound directly across water is amplified.
8. Dust pollution from unloading of ships' cargoes will occur 24 hours
a day.
9. Dust and noise would be multiplied when two ships are operating
simultaneously.
10. Dirty and unhealthy ship emissions from its funnel would create a
health hazard to thousands of nearby residents.
11. The inevitable reversing truck beeps are piercing and could occur
24 hours per day.
12. The operations would create a public nuisance, causing:
* Interference with the quiet enjoyment of over a thousand
neighbouring residences.
* There would be increased risk to the health and wellbeing of Pyrmont
residents, particularly those (but not limited to) neighbouring Glebe
Island.
13. Pyrmont has become the most densely populated suburb in Australia
since about 2010 so these proposed industrial plants will interfere
with a huge number of residents.
14. Jones and Johnsons Bays can no longer be classified as a high
industrial working harbour locations since the demolition of the CSR
site in Pyrmont in the 1990s and the subsequent urban renewal of the
site to create Jacksons Landing. That urban renewal was approved by
both local and State governments.
15. Last century Glebe Island was used for transiting imported cars.
The removal of this Glebe Island use was part of the urban renewal
plan BUT to now have two new 24/7 industrial plants would be both
contrary to the urban renewal plan and also the plan to modernise and
de-industrialise the harbour.
16. It is invalid to argue that the working harbour concept of over a
hundred years still applies to today. The active encouragement of
urban renewal with its high residential occupation of the harbour
shores belies this.
17. Both proposed industrial buildings would be eyesores that hark
back to the 20th century industrial Sydney landscapes.
18. Mention has been made of the Hanson proposition being a 20 year
transition plan. It is beyond doubt such transition would become
permanent.
19. The truck movements related to Hanson would be considerable and
would undoubtedly cause chaos on the neighbouring road network and
Anzac Bridge, already heavily used.
20. The increased water traffic congestion created by the industrial
cargo ships and tugs would create dangers to the many other craft
(pleasure boats, canoes, fishing boats, dragon boats, party boats,
leisure craft etc) entering and exiting Blackwattle and Rozelle Bays
via the narrow pass under Glebe Island bridge.
21. Increased water pollution is likely, and inevitable if there is a
marine accident of any kind in such a restricted and crowded zone.

Submission attached

please see attached letter of objection

I am resending the evolve* submission because I am not sure that it went
the first time. It is uploaded as a document below. Please read it.

Submission attached

I have up loaded the document.

See attached file

as per attachment uploaded

Please see attached

I have uploaded a document. I am writing to strongly object to the
proposed development on Glebe Island by Hanson Concrete. It is
unconscionable that this development would even be considered. It is a
disgrace and an ill conceived and ill considered proposition. How can
a development of this type be built in what is now a high density
residential area that is filled with people. This area has been
developed to accommodate over 16,00 people including young children
and the elderly. Glebe Island Berths 1 and 2 have not been used for
heavy industry in over ten years. It has not been used consistently as
an industrial port in that time and to return it to such, is to betray
the community that has been encouraged to develop a mere 200 metres
across from the proposed development.

The 24/7 operation is an affront to human dignity and the freedoms
that every citizen in this country is entitled to. Every person living
in Australia is entitled to live in their own homes in peace and
safety. The proposed development is in direct opposition to this
essential right. I implore the NSW government to stand up for the
rights of its citizens and stop this development. Port Botany is far
more suited to this development than Glebe Island.

We have been told that if the 24/7 toxic fumes, noise and dust are too
much, to go inside, close our doors and windows and turn on the
air-conditioning. We have been told that if the 24/7 lights shining
into our homes is too much, then go and buy some curtains and keep
them closed. What country do I live in that treats its citizens with
such distain? I demand that my rights be upheld and this development
be stopped.

The EIS only gives estimated outcomes for noise, dust, light emission
and toxic fumes. It admits that these may well be above accepted
levels but that's ok because it won't be too far above the accepted
levels. It's ok for regulated levels to be ignored a little bit. It's
ok if Hansons don't conform to the specified regulations for the
safety and health of residents. In other words it's ok if residents
breath in a little bit of toxic fumes or can't sleep because there is
only a bit too much noise or a little bit too much light shining into
their bedroom or are coughing a little bit because of the dust in the
air. When did the rights of citizens get ground underfoot? Is NSW now
a dictatorship?

I object on the following grounds:

Cumulative Affects
The Hanson EIS and the Port Authority REF give individual estimates fo
the affects of noise, light, dust, toxic fumes and road safety but
they are refusing to give cumulative results. It makes sense that to
give a true indication of the affects on residents then a report needs
to be done that takes into account the cumulative effects of all these
factors.

Plain English
The Hanson EIS is written in such technical language it is almost
impossible to understand. I am of the understanding that reports of
this kind where community opinion is sought then it must be written so
that a lay person can understand it. The EIS needs to be redone
because it does not meet this criteria.

Noise
The combined operation of the MUF and the concrete plant will create
noise far above approved levels. The 24/7 operation will result in a
continuous level of noise that will create impossible conditions for
nearby residents to obtain a good night's sleep. No sleep, lots of
health problems, lots more pressure on the hospital and medical
systems. Is Hansons or The Port Authority or The NSW Government going
to pay my medical bills?

All noise measurement has been done from Distillery Drive well away
from the area to be most affected by the development. All readings
should be done from 2 Bowman Street which both the EIS and the Port
Authority REF admits will be the most affected. Oh Joy! Something to
aspire to - the most affected!

The ships that will docking at Glebe Island are not modern cruise
ships but cargo ships. They do not have the facility for ship to shore
power and therefore there will be a constant noise emitted from them.

The Beeping of trucks reversing will be exacerbated as sound carries
across water. Have you ever heard what beeping trucks are like in the
dead of night? If this proposal goes ahead perhaps you could provide
residents with megaphones so that they can yell across the water into
the dead of night asking the trucks to stop beeping. This suggestion
is as ludicrous as the proposed development. I cannot believe that I
have to write to justify the lunacy of this whole proposal.

Air Pollution
The cargo ships docking at Glebe Island will emit high levels of
sulphur that are far above the recommended levels. The 24/7 operation
will double the exposure of residents to the toxic fumes.

Dust Pollution
The ships will be unloading thousands of tonnes of sand which means
that fine dust particles will be emitted into the air and blown across
the surrounding areas and into residents homes and lungs. This will be
made worse when there is any wind especially as it is proposed that
the trucks will not be covered. Will someone from the government visit
me in hospital when I have lung disease? Will someone from the
government come to my funeral to comfort my family?

Light Pollution
The proposal places no restrictions on the use of lights on the ships
and on Glebe Island. The 24/7 operation means that there will be
lights shining into my bedroom all night. I am a very grumpy angry
person when I don't get my sleep. Will the government pay for marriage
counselling when, because I am sleep deprived I argue with my husband?

Road Traffic
Using the figures quoted by Hanson and the Port Authority and a
calculator because the figures defy belief, there will be between 3500
and 5000 truck movements a day. A day! Shall I repeat that? A day!
Where are Hanson and The Port Authority going to send them? Over Anzac
Bridge. That won't get them very far. Anzac Bridge is already choked
with traffic. Through Rozelle? Good luck with that one. I don't go to
Birkenhead Point on certain days of the week because it takes me an
hour and a half to get there. Perhaps they should have spoken to the
Roads Department before they proposed this. Oh dear. I forgot. They
didn't ask them. They didn't even tell them.

Marine Safety
Johnstons Bay is a very busy waterway with lots and lots of marine
traffic coming and going into Blackwattle Bay. It is a hazardous
entrance and exit to Blackwattle Bay. The cargo ships docked at Glebe
Island will create greater congestion and a greater possibility of
accidents.

Bays Precinct
The proposed development is inconsistent with the 2000 Master Plan.
The area has become a tourist destination and the postposed
development will detract from the tranquility of the area and the
attractiveness to tourists.

Aesthetics
The proposed structures are completely lacking in aesthetic value and
will be an over-scaled blot on the landscape between Rozelle and
Pyrmont. It will hark back to an era of dirty, ugly industrial
buildings and activities dumping high-level pollution of all types on
existing and future residential areas. So much for the pleasant
walkway round the area that is used by tourist and locals constantly.
Won't the Sydney Marathon Runners love running through fume filled air
when the ships are in port. What a great backdrop - cargo ships
belching pollutants into the air along with cement dust and sand
particles covering everything. Shall I write the Tourist brochure? I
can see it now. `Come visit Pyrmont and you too can experience toxic
fumes, ugly buildings and old cargo ships'. Is the Government going to
offer to supply amendments to all the tourist guides that suggest a
walk along the foreshore at Pyrmont?

I hope that I have made myself clear. I strongly object to the
proposed development on Glebe Island. I don't care who it is, Hanson
Concrete or the Port Authority, it is an inappropriate development and
if the proposal for the Batching Plant and the MUF is approved by the
Berejiklian Government then it is a disgraceful betrayal of the
residents of Jacksons Landing.

Please refer to the attached submission

Submission attached

Submission attached

Submission attached