I am writing to object to the 24/7 nature of the concrete batching
facility proposed to be built at Glebe Island. As a working port I
have no objection to the facility being built but cannot see the need
for it to operate 24/7. The building sites requiring the concrete will
not be operation 24/7 and the location of this site is in close
proximity to multiple dwellings. The operation of the plant 24/7 will
severely impact on the lives of many residents in an area the state
government targeted for development.

I object to the above development because:
1 .a very noticeable increase in noise from trucks and ships
(motors will run 24 h day and night.
2. a major increase in dangerous exhaust air pollution from ships and
trucks
3. increase in bay water pollution
4. onsite night lighting disturbs our sleep
5. the increase in traffic in the waterways by heavy industrial
vessels may result in safety issues for the recreational boats like
kayaking, dragon boats,rowing boats, small sailing ships.
6. health issues for all people breathing in contaminated air day
and night (specially the elderly, asthma sufferer)

I object to this submission. I live within a couple of hundred metres of
the proposed site, and my child's school (amongst others) is also
nearby. I am concerned about noise and particle pollution and the
effects on our sleep, concentration levels, respiratory function, and
potential long term health effects. It is too close to residential
areas, it should be moved to a less populated area (e.g. ports area).

We are object this DA because we live opposite this Glebe site and our
community--Jacksons Landing will be heavily impact by the noise, dust,
and also with visual impact. It's not not appropriate to consider this
site as concrete batching facility, hope government can consider
another better option. Thanks for your attention.

We are object this DA because we live opposite this Glebe site and our
community--Jacksons Landing will be heavily impact by the noise, dust,
and also with visual impact. It's not not appropriate to consider this
site as concrete batching facility, hope government can consider
another better option. Thanks for your attention.

We are object this DA because we live opposite this Glebe site and our
community--Jacksons Landing will be heavily impact by the noise, dust,
and also with visual impact. It's not not appropriate to consider this
site as concrete batching facility, hope government can consider
another better option. Thanks for your attention.

We are object this DA because we live opposite this Glebe site and our
community--Jacksons Landing will be heavily impact by the noise, dust,
and also with visual impact. It's not not appropriate to consider this
site as concrete batching facility, hope government can consider
another better option. Thanks for your attention.

I support Hanson's Glebe Island concrete plant for the following reasons:
- The Glebe concrete plant will allow Hanson to continue its supply of
concrete after the closure of the Blackwattle Bay concrete plant
- Aggregates can be delivered by ship from the Hanson Bass Point
Quarry which will minimise tipper truck movements

I support this project - the facility will be vital to supply concrete to
the upcoming infrastructure projects and developments for Sydney. Use
of marine transport will reduce truck movements. This project will
also be in keeping with the history of Sydney Harbour being a working
Port.

This is not a professional, empirical, highly researched submission. It
is from a local resident who has lived less than a kilometre from the
proposed site for over 40 years and who has noted with increasing
pride the improvement in public amenity over time. With the
incremental removal of coal-fired power generation (White Bay Power
Station), containerised shipping, some bulk materials transfer and car
storage (Sydney Ports Authority) and, most recently, temporary
convention facilities, Glebe Island and its harbour edge have been
progressively improved - as one would expect for a Government-owned
site less than two kilometres from the country's largest CBD. The
option of reactivating the old Glebe Island Bridge for pedestrian,
cyclist and public transport use is particularly enticing, as is a
passenger ferry wharf on Rozelle Bay.

Given the high profile location of the proposed batching plant, its
inherent ugliness, possible adverse environmental impacts (noise and
air pollution 24:7) and the huge opportunity cost resulting from the
loss of such a valuable site to more amenable uses, I find it
incomprehensible that a company with even an iota of civic pride or a
government supposedly committed to urban renewal could propose such a
nineteenth century idea.

No matter how much you mask this base proposal with notions of
retaining a working harbour (largely romance) or co-existence with
existing adverse impacts (the former grain silos - two wrongs don't
make a right), or equity because Hanson is being bumped out of
Blackwattle Bay where it has had an overly generous existence for
many, many years, the fact remains that a highly visible landmark site
within spitting distance of Sydney's central business district is
being touted for a dirty industrial future with heavy trucks spewing
off in all directions at all hours of the day.

How committed is the State Government to its Bays Precinct urban
renewal program? Fine words to appease the Inner Westies, but when it
comes to actual progress on the ground nothing happens - Callan Park
continues to rot; little attempt was made to keep Google at White Bay,
there has been no start on the much-hyped foreshore promenade,
shore-to-ship power is not being provided to the cruise terminal in
White Bay and improvements to existing public transport remain
illusory. I have little faith in the government holding to its lofty
statements on urban renewal when cashed-up proponents like Hanson come
along cap-in-hand asking favours which mere residents cannot prevent.

Yes, Sydney needs concrete batching plants as the city continues to
expand, but not cheek by jowl with medium-to-high-density housing and
not in locations where we should be improving amenity over time - not
diminishing it. Certainly, as the years pass, things change. Not so
long ago the State Government built an expensive high level bridge
(Anzac Bridge) because Hanson used a ship that needed to pass
underneath. How long did Hanson keep the ship? Not long...