Moorebank Waste Facility

I oppose the proposed Moorebank Waste Processing Project (Project Number 05 0157) at Lot 6 DP 1065574, Newbridge Road, Moorebank.

1. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the proposed development is far too close to existing and proposed residential homes. The proposed development is just 250 metres from the Georges Fair housing estate. Trucks using the proposed facility will travel even closer to residential homes. Trucks will likely short cut through Georges Fair, passing parks and local residents, using roads not designed for massive trucks.

2. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the risks from asbestos and toxins. At the community consultation meeting held on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club, the representatives of the developer refused to comment on whether asbestos would be processed at the facility and whether toxins would be released. There is a link between silica dust and lung cancer (`Occupational Exposure to Silica and Lung Cancer', Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention Journal, Volume 19, 2010). There is no known cure for silicosis (`A Brief Review of Silicosis in the US', Environ Health Insights, Volume 4, East Carolina University, 2010). The developer plans to install sweepers "where trucks and people will travel" and that there are "unsealed areas" in the development. Their own documentation refers to "likely dust from the recycling facility" (pg 3, developer's information distributed on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club). This is an unacceptable health risk for local residents.

3. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the potential for flooding. The proposed development is in an area that floods. In the event of a flood, unsafe building materials and material stockpiles may cause an environmental disaster throughout Moorebank and the entire Georges River Basin.

4. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the NSW Government has indicated there will be "a return of local planning powers to local communities" (`NSW govt scraps 3A planning provision', SMH, 4/4/2011). The local community is opposed to this development. Councillors of the Liverpool City Council have voted unanimously against this development (Minutes, Liverpool City Council meeting, 15/6/2011).

5. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the proposed development is incompatible with the current and planned residential and recreational uses of the area. The proposed concrete processing facility is just 250 metres from the Georges Fair housing estate, with a high proportion of residents having young families. The area is zoned E2 Environmental Conservation. It should not be used for a concrete processing plant. In close proximity are schools, parklands, the Georges River itself, cycleways, a proposed waterside marina, a library and a golf club. The land is more suitable for recreational facilities or a reserve. Even the owners of the Benedict Recycling plant at Moorebank (which borders the proposed facility) have accepted that the area is no longer suitable for a building waste processing plant and have started to shut down their operations to create their own housing estate and marina.

6. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of increased traffic. The developer states the proposed facility will result in an extra 324 truck movements a day, which is "very low and will have no impact on the arterial road network" (developer's information distributed on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club). Increased traffic will have a significant impact on arterial roads including Nuwarra Road, Newbridge Road and Governor Macquarie Drive. There is already significant traffic in the area which will be made worse by the `Intermodal', which will cause an extra 1.5 million truck movements in the first year. Truck movements will primarily be in peak hours, further impacting on already high congestion. The residents of Moorebank and other areas should not experience any additional noise, pollution and congestion from this proposed facility, given the likelihood of the `Intermodal'.

7. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the negative impact on land values. Residents of the Moorebank precinct in particular have spent significant amounts of money on land and homes. The proposed development will have a severe impact on land values and residents will not be compensated.

8. I oppose the building waste processing plant because there was a lack of community consultation at a meeting held by representatives of the developers on 31/5/2011. The organisers did not notify a significant number of local residents and future residents about the meeting. The organisers refused to answer questions from local residents on health risks. The organisers did not allow time to note down and respond to residents' concerns.

9. I oppose the building waste processing plant because it is dangerous to residents for a concrete processing plant to be located in this area of metropolitan Sydney. There are pre-existing waste processing plants operated by Benedict Recycling and Smorgan Steel Recycling at Chipping Norton. Benedict Recycling is planning to build another plant at Heathcote. There is no need for so many waste processing plants in such close proximity to each other.

As a local community member, I OPPOSE the building waste processing plant. I call on councillors, the NSW Parliament, the Minister for Planning, the Planning Assessment Commission, the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure and the Premier of NSW to REJECT this proposal.

I oppose the proposed Moorebank Waste Processing Project (Project Number 05 0157) at Lot 6 DP 1065574, Newbridge Road, Moorebank.

1. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the proposed development is far too close to existing and proposed residential homes. The proposed development is just 250 metres from the Georges Fair housing estate. Trucks using the proposed facility will travel even closer to residential homes. Trucks will likely short cut through Georges Fair, passing parks and local residents, using roads not designed for massive trucks.

2. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the risks from asbestos and toxins. At the community consultation meeting held on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club, the representatives of the developer refused to comment on whether asbestos would be processed at the facility and whether toxins would be released. There is a link between silica dust and lung cancer (`Occupational Exposure to Silica and Lung Cancer', Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention Journal, Volume 19, 2010). There is no known cure for silicosis (`A Brief Review of Silicosis in the US', Environ Health Insights, Volume 4, East Carolina University, 2010). The developer plans to install sweepers "where trucks and people will travel" and that there are "unsealed areas" in the development. Their own documentation refers to "likely dust from the recycling facility" (pg 3, developer's information distributed on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club). This is an unacceptable health risk for local residents.

3. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the potential for flooding. The proposed development is in an area that floods. In the event of a flood, unsafe building materials and material stockpiles may cause an environmental disaster throughout Moorebank and the entire Georges River Basin.

4. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the NSW Government has indicated there will be "a return of local planning powers to local communities" (`NSW govt scraps 3A planning provision', SMH, 4/4/2011). The local community is opposed to this development. Councillors of the Liverpool City Council have voted unanimously against this development (Minutes, Liverpool City Council meeting, 15/6/2011).

5. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the proposed development is incompatible with the current and planned residential and recreational uses of the area. The proposed concrete processing facility is just 250 metres from the Georges Fair housing estate, with a high proportion of residents having young families. The area is zoned E2 Environmental Conservation. It should not be used for a concrete processing plant. In close proximity are schools, parklands, the Georges River itself, cycleways, a proposed waterside marina, a library and a golf club. The land is more suitable for recreational facilities or a reserve. Even the owners of the Benedict Recycling plant at Moorebank (which borders the proposed facility) have accepted that the area is no longer suitable for a building waste processing plant and have started to shut down their operations to create their own housing estate and marina.

6. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of increased traffic. The developer states the proposed facility will result in an extra 324 truck movements a day, which is "very low and will have no impact on the arterial road network" (developer's information distributed on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club). Increased traffic will have a significant impact on arterial roads including Nuwarra Road, Newbridge Road and Governor Macquarie Drive. There is already significant traffic in the area which will be made worse by the `Intermodal', which will cause an extra 1.5 million truck movements in the first year. Truck movements will primarily be in peak hours, further impacting on already high congestion. The residents of Moorebank and other areas should not experience any additional noise, pollution and congestion from this proposed facility, given the likelihood of the `Intermodal'.

7. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the negative impact on land values. Residents of the Moorebank precinct in particular have spent significant amounts of money on land and homes. The proposed development will have a severe impact on land values and residents will not be compensated.

8. I oppose the building waste processing plant because there was a lack of community consultation at a meeting held by representatives of the developers on 31/5/2011. The organisers did not notify a significant number of local residents and future residents about the meeting. The organisers refused to answer questions from local residents on health risks. The organisers did not allow time to note down and respond to residents' concerns.

9. I oppose the building waste processing plant because it is dangerous to residents for a concrete processing plant to be located in this area of metropolitan Sydney. There are pre-existing waste processing plants operated by Benedict Recycling and Smorgan Steel Recycling at Chipping Norton. Benedict Recycling is planning to build another plant at Heathcote. There is no need for so many waste processing plants in such close proximity to each other.

As a local community member, I OPPOSE the building waste processing plant. I call on councillors, the NSW Parliament, the Minister for Planning, the Planning Assessment Commission, the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure and the Premier of NSW to REJECT this proposal.

I oppose the proposed Moorebank Waste Processing Project (Project Number 05 0157) at Lot 6 DP 1065574, Newbridge Road, Moorebank.

1. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the proposed development is far too close to existing and proposed residential homes. The proposed development is just 250 metres from the Georges Fair housing estate. Trucks using the proposed facility will travel even closer to residential homes. Trucks will likely short cut through Georges Fair, passing parks and local residents, using roads not designed for massive trucks.

2. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the risks from asbestos and toxins. At the community consultation meeting held on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club, the representatives of the developer refused to comment on whether asbestos would be processed at the facility and whether toxins would be released. There is a link between silica dust and lung cancer (`Occupational Exposure to Silica and Lung Cancer', Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention Journal, Volume 19, 2010). There is no known cure for silicosis (`A Brief Review of Silicosis in the US', Environ Health Insights, Volume 4, East Carolina University, 2010). The developer plans to install sweepers "where trucks and people will travel" and that there are "unsealed areas" in the development. Their own documentation refers to "likely dust from the recycling facility" (pg 3, developer's information distributed on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club). This is an unacceptable health risk for local residents.

3. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the potential for flooding. The proposed development is in an area that floods. In the event of a flood, unsafe building materials and material stockpiles may cause an environmental disaster throughout Moorebank and the entire Georges River Basin.

4. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the NSW Government has indicated there will be "a return of local planning powers to local communities" (`NSW govt scraps 3A planning provision', SMH, 4/4/2011). The local community is opposed to this development. Councillors of the Liverpool City Council have voted unanimously against this development (Minutes, Liverpool City Council meeting, 15/6/2011).

5. I oppose the building waste processing plant because the proposed development is incompatible with the current and planned residential and recreational uses of the area. The proposed concrete processing facility is just 250 metres from the Georges Fair housing estate, with a high proportion of residents having young families. The area is zoned E2 Environmental Conservation. It should not be used for a concrete processing plant. In close proximity are schools, parklands, the Georges River itself, cycleways, a proposed waterside marina, a library and a golf club. The land is more suitable for recreational facilities or a reserve. Even the owners of the Benedict Recycling plant at Moorebank (which borders the proposed facility) have accepted that the area is no longer suitable for a building waste processing plant and have started to shut down their operations to create their own housing estate and marina.

6. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of increased traffic. The developer states the proposed facility will result in an extra 324 truck movements a day, which is "very low and will have no impact on the arterial road network" (developer's information distributed on 31/5/2011 at New Brighton Golf Club). Increased traffic will have a significant impact on arterial roads including Nuwarra Road, Newbridge Road and Governor Macquarie Drive. There is already significant traffic in the area which will be made worse by the `Intermodal', which will cause an extra 1.5 million truck movements in the first year. Truck movements will primarily be in peak hours, further impacting on already high congestion. The residents of Moorebank and other areas should not experience any additional noise, pollution and congestion from this proposed facility, given the likelihood of the `Intermodal'.

7. I oppose the building waste processing plant because of the negative impact on land values. Residents of the Moorebank precinct in particular have spent significant amounts of money on land and homes. The proposed development will have a severe impact on land values and residents will not be compensated.

8. I oppose the building waste processing plant because there was a lack of community consultation at a meeting held by representatives of the developers on 31/5/2011. The organisers did not notify a significant number of local residents and future residents about the meeting. The organisers refused to answer questions from local residents on health risks. The organisers did not allow time to note down and respond to residents' concerns.

9. I oppose the building waste processing plant because it is dangerous to residents for a concrete processing plant to be located in this area of metropolitan Sydney. There are pre-existing waste processing plants operated by Benedict Recycling and Smorgan Steel Recycling at Chipping Norton. Benedict Recycling is planning to build another plant at Heathcote. There is no need for so many waste processing plants in such close proximity to each other.

As a local community member, I OPPOSE the building waste processing plant. I call on councillors, the NSW Parliament, the Minister for Planning, the Planning Assessment Commission, the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure and the Premier of NSW to REJECT this proposal.

I object to the submission for various reasons including the negative impact this facility will have on local air quality, noise quality, road quality (heavy-load traffic), and local childrens health and safety (e.g airborne particles and increased heavy-load traffic on Brickmakers Drive). This facility does not fit in with the lifestyle local residnets visualised when deciding to build in this family-friendly community at Georges Fair Estate.

Dear Sir/Madam

As a young family moving into the Georges Fair Community in the middle of 2013 we would like to raise our concerns over the proposed Material Recycling Facility in Moorebank. In particular the potential environmental factors the facility would impact on the area including an increase in air and noise pollution and an increase in heavy traffic congestion.

We bought land at Georges Fair with the expectation that this would be a good investment in our families future, with a young child it is important to us that we provide her with the best quality of life and a healthy environment to grow up in. The decision on the location was based on these factors, along with affordability and proximity to work.

We are also concerned that this development would potentially lower the property values in the area and make it a less attractive location to live.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed recycling facility

I object to the submission as the addition of the waste recycling facility in this area creates a serious new hazard in my suburb.
There is a cycle and footpath the length of Brickmakers drive and the addition of over 300 truck movements alongside a portion of this road creates a hazard for any footpath user, including the number of new families that now call Georges Fair home. There is no fence or divider that separates this footpath from the road where the trucks will be travelling.
The current Benedict recycling yard has created an environmental problem for nearby business as their gutters have been blocked by dust build up. As with all new residences, all of Georges Fair houses have rain water collection systems. Regardless of any dust minimising features, dust will become airborne from the site and contaminate gutters, tanks and rainwater collection systems within Georges Fair and other houses. This could lead to potential blockages of gutters and pipework with possible water damage and increased maintenance of filter and system components.
The proposed link road will add a new intersection onto a road that does not have any intersections except for two roundabouts. The trucks for the recycling facility will need to turn in and off this road, across oncoming traffic. The area where the link road will be placed is at a blind curve in the road and could be a potential accident spot as fully laden trucks attempt to turn right and head to towards Newbridge Road. Council currently has an application with the RMS for Brickmakers drive to be load limited road which will affect truck movements on this road. Brickmakers Drive was not planned or constructed with this use in mind.
I believe the traffic report may have underestimated the number of vehicles that are in the local area. Georges Fair is still being developed and future households will add to the traffic movements in the area, particularly in the North east of Georges Fair, where the link road would be added. Properties directly opposite were the link road would be constructed will be significantly impacted by the number of truck movements that this road will produce right opposite their front door.
Georges Fair and Brickmakers Drive were constructed without taking this link road into account. Placing an intersection like this on an access road in an area of young families could lead to traffic problems and potential accidents. The noise and dust that could carry from this site will potentially impact on our new house and our wellbeing.

I oppose the proposed Moorebank Waste Processing Project at lot 6 DP 1065574, Newbridge Road, Moorebank. Please see the attached PDF file for my detailed statements.

I oppose the proposed Moorebank Waste Processing Project at lot 6 DP 1065574, Newbridge Road, Moorebank. Please see the attached PDF file for my detailed statements.

I oppose the proposed Moorebank Waste Processing Project at lot 6 DP 1065574, Newbridge Road, Moorebank. Please see the attached PDF file for my detailed statements.

I oppose the proposed Moorebank Waste Processing Project at lot 6 DP 1065574, Newbridge Road, Moorebank. Please see the attached PDF file for my detailed statements.

To the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure,
We are the grandparents of two children who live in the Georges Fair housing estate at Moorebank. We are quite upset at the proposed recycling plant which will be placed a few hundred metres from the new home that my daughter and son-in-law recently built. I have read through the information on your website and I am shocked that such a proposal is even being considered so close to residential housing.

In particular, the increased traffic has the potential to cause significant delays in the local area. The dust that is generated from the concrete crushing and other waste entering the local environment may have a negative impact on the health of our grandchildren.

We live on the other side of the Georges River in Milperra and even for us, it would be ludicrous to suggest that a recycling plant be built near us. However, this proposal is even closer to peoples' homes and should not proceed on health grounds.

As far as we are concerned, this vacant land would have much better uses that could provide a benefit to the community, such as parkland, nature reserve, tennis courts or access to the water way. The idea of building a recycling plant that will have a negative impact on the water, environment, local animals and human beings is unfair for the young couples and families who have recently moved into the area.

We have lived in this part of Sydney for a number of decades. We have seen a significant amount of change in the area, however, all of these changes have involved more and more residential homes being built in the area. To place an industrial site in an area surrounding by homes is unwise and should not even be supported by the local environmental plan.

We would ask the members of the panel considering this application to think about whether they would like a recycling plant to be built a few hundred metres from their home. If not, why? Surely, you would also have concerns about air, noise, dust, stress, traffic, asbestos, etc. We ask you to use your power and authority to reject this proposal due to the risk of health problems. As with other health issues such as mesothelioma, the true health effects are only known decades after the exposure. By allowing this recycling plant to be built, the planning authorities would be risking the lives and health of our grandchildren, Andrew and Xavier. Their lives are not worth the risk!

We ask you to register our opposition to this proposal and reject the development.

Marilyn and Gary Amesbury

To the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure,

We are the grandparents of two children, Andrew and Xavier, who live in the Georges Fair housing estate at Moorebank. We are quite upset at the proposed recycling plant which will be placed a few hundred metres from the new home that my son and daughter-in-law recently built. We have read through the information on your website and I am shocked that such a proposal is even being considered so close to residential housing.

In particular, the increased traffic has the potential to cause significant delays in the local area. The dust that is generated from the concrete crushing and other waste entering the local environment may have a negative impact on the health of our grandchildren.

As far as we are concerned, this vacant land would have much better uses that could provide a benefit to the community, such as parkland, nature reserve, tennis courts or access to the water way. The idea of building a recycling plant that will have a negative impact on the water, environment, local animals and human beings is unfair for the young couples and families who have recently moved into the area.

We have lived in this part of Sydney for a number of decades. We have seen a significant amount of change in the area, however, all of these changes have involved more and more residential homes being built in the area. To place an industrial site in an area surrounding by homes is unwise and should not even be supported by the local environmental plan.

We would ask the members of the panel considering this application to think about whether they would like a recycling plant to be built a few hundred metres from their home. If not, why? Surely, you would also have concerns about air, noise, dust, stress, traffic, asbestos, etc. We ask you to use your power and authority to reject this proposal due to the risk of health problems. As with other health issues such as mesothelioma, the true health effects are only known decades after the exposure. By allowing this recycling plant to be built, the planning authorities would be risking the lives and health of our grandchildren, Andrew and Xavier. Their lives are not worth the risk!

We ask you to register our opposition to this proposal and reject the development.

David and Mary Sutton

I have previously provided a submission in relation to this matter. Please note that this matter has now been referred to the Independent Commission Against Corruption, due to some irregularities in relation to the planning processes employed.

Materials recycling facility just off new bridge road will affect traffic in large way(especially in peak times) and noise could also be damaging for young kids by factory as there is new residential area. As moorebank has got a beautiful chipping Norton lake it will also hamper the nature's beauty.
flora and fauna will be affected in negative way.
moreover, the site is next to Georges river which will be affected by recycling facility wastes.

The whole area next to it is newly developed residential homes, it will definitely Not have a positive effect on these new developments.

To whom it may concern

I am currently in the final process of commencement of building my dream home on Hoy Street, in Georges Fair. About a year ago, I visited a friend in Moorebank who handed me a brochure. The brochure had a picture of some happy families living in a community surrounded by a lot of green trees, beautiful parks and gorgeous houses. These enticing visuals were coupled with the worlds... "Welcome to the good life... Welcome to Georges Fair... ".....

The day I was handed that brochure my life changed. Previous to that day, I had been looking to move out of a small one bedroom apartment in the inner west and find a house to live, in an area where there was far less pollution, more trees, more parks and a sense of community. I found that place in the brochure that day.. Georges Fair....

Today, I'd never thought I'd be finding myself fighting for the exact things that enticed me to the area. I was horrified to learn that a recycling plant was to operate close to a booming residential area. And my dream of a cleaner type of living will be taken away because Moorebank Recyclers have more money and obviously more power than what I do or anyone else does in our beautiful new community.

For so many reasons, I am completely against this recycling plant being operational and not just posing a threat to the community at large, but also the environment and most importantly our health.

In summary, the following are just a small handful of reasons why this facility should not be allowed to be build.

1. Very close proximity to a booming residential area
2. Hazard to health - airborne hazards will travel into homes where children play, increase risk to asthma sufferers.
3. Unknown long term risks to health.. Building materials have asbestos and these fibres are deadly.. Watering down, covers etc, will not be enough when so close to a residential area.
4. Environmental Hazard - why are they even considering building near a water artery?
5. Increase in traffic- trucks are already an issue on Brickmakers drive.. I believe there is a plan on increasing current number of trucks to 250 .. That's just plain ridiculous in a suburban area..
6. Close to schools
7. How can there be a new marina going up next to a recycling plant.
8. Devalue of all the beautiful properties in Georges Fair.
9. Noise pollution
10. Increase of accidents on Brickmakers drive. Due to the increase in heavy vehicles who are too big to use that small road.

These are just a few points that are very obvious to myself and I'm sure the rest of the community.

Please take our outrage at this proposal seriously as I want to still be able to live the dream I read about.

Thank you for listening..
Izzy

Hi

My sister is building her dream home in Georges Fair at the moment. I was astounded to learn that there will be a recycling plant proposed to be build metres away from a large residential development and a possible new marina.

I would like to object to this for many reasons particularly those surrounding a risk to the environment, health and the fact that all those poor people who purchased land in GF were not being told of this possible threat to their enjoyment of their assets.

The government has imposed a carbon tax to give us all a cleaner future... Why does it even entertain large corporations like this to operate in a booming urban landscape... It doesn't sound right.

Please accept this as a big fat Objection for the sake of our children's future...

Regards
S.D

My husband and I are the registered owners of a block of land in the Georges Fair Estate and are about to commence construction of a dwelling on that land.

We were motivated to embark on this construction project within Georges Fair based on the plans for the Estate presented to us by the agent for the Developer and discussions about proposals for future development within the Estate. Furthermore, we were impressed by the stringent building guidelines which would have the effect of ensuring that we were the owners of a quality home in a sort after estate.

My husband and I strongly object to the proposed materials recycling facility at Moorebank on the following grounds:

1. That the granting of the proposal may have the effect of reducing property prices and/or rental return, placing us and other homeowners at a serious financial disadvantage.

2. That the noise generated from the recycling facility and/or trucks accessing the recycling facility via Brickmakers Drive, Moorebank and surrounding roads will directly impact on the right to quiet use and enjoyment of the land by either our family or a tenant.

3. That it is inevitable that debris and unsecured building materials will be spilled onto Brickmakers Drive, Moorebank and/or surrounding roads, posing environmental, health and traffic risks.

4. There are numerous and undoubtedly unknown health risks associated with the breaking down and recycling of construction materials which may include or be contaminated with asbestos and other carcinogenic materials. To allow such recycling activity to take place on property adjoining a residential housing development would be negligent.

5. That the approval of the recycling facility will deter investors from following through with development proposals which may have the effect of positively impacting on the Georges Fair Estate and increase its desirability as an estate and potentially increase/maintain property prices.

It is difficult to comprehend how a housing development the size of Georges Fair with such stringent building guidelines and strong property prices could be approved with the knowledge that a proposal for a neighbouring Materials Recycling Facility was also on the table.

Approval of the proposed Materials Recycling Facility at Moorebank would be extremely disappointing to all residents and land owners of Georges Fair and would lead my husband and I to make the decision not to move our young family into the home we are building at Georges Fair out of a fear that doing so, may expose them to preventable and avoidable health risks.

I wish to object to the proposed waste facility, as I strongly feel that it would have a strong negative affect on the entire area. I chose to buy and build in this area knowing it was being developed as a quiet, new, residential zone, close to open natural spaces, and not a heavy industrial waste facility.

The increase in traffic alone , not to mention the pollution,noise, dust which would be created by such a facility would suggest that it would be suited for an industrial zone, not a residential zone.

I am also greatly concerned about the degrease in property value Such a facility would have to the Moorebank area. Had we been informed of such a development, we certainly would not have purchased in the area.

I hope my objections and those of others in the area, are taken into consideration, and the proposal declined.

I wish to object to the proposed waste facility, as I strongly feel that it would have a strong negative affect on the entire area. I chose to buy and build in this area knowing it was being developed as a quiet, new, residential zone, close to open natural spaces, and not a heavy industrial waste facility.

The increase in traffic alone , not to mention the pollution,noise, dust which would be created by such a facility would suggest that it would be suited for an industrial zone, not a residential zone.

I am also greatly concerned about the degrease in property value Such a facility would have to the Moorebank area. Had we been informed of such a development, we certainly would not have purchased in the area.

I hope my objections and those of others in the area, are taken into consideration, and the proposal declined.

To whom it may concern,

I believe the proposed recycling plant is in a non suitable area as Georges River, close proximity of residential housing and natural bushland are very close by.

If this proposed recycling plant is approved, there will be many health issue that many local residents will need to deal with from fine dust to noise pollution.

I can ensure you there are many other suitable site for this proposed recycling plant, somewhere which is not surrounded by natural bushland, local river and residential.

Please consider our voice as a small residents within the big community.

Kind Regards,

Albert Sun