Kurnell Refinery Conversion

I object to the proposal for a number of reasons. The creation of a fuel storage facility provides a significant change to the safety of the Kurnell community. I bring the fire at Buncefield, UK, to attention as an example of the danger. As there is only one access road in and out of Kurnell, a major accident or incident will block Captain Cook drive and again the residents will be isolated from escape. This was demonstrated recently when the water treatment chemical fire occurred (placing the Refinery under major threat) and blocking the only access for residents, also demonstrated with major vehicle accidents forcing the roads closure. Are the residents expected to swim to la Perouse to escape? Kurnell is one of the Historically significant sites in Australia, if not the most and should be protected as such. Also the additional threat created by the Storage facility for anyone seeking to cripple the transport industry through sabotage is significant. The busiest airport in the country is 5 km north and the approach paths flies over the facility. The industrial infrastructure at Kurnell then includes Airport approach paths, Fuel Storage facility and desalination Plant all within 5 km of each other. There is a danger with any one of these individual ly however in an emergency one can have a disasterous effect on the others. My suggestion is to instead of the proposed Fuel Storage facility, redevelop and create parkland that follows the example of Ballast Point, Birchgrove, where the former fuel storage facility has been developed into parkland for the entire community to enjoy.