Can something PLEASE be done about the noise which follows AFTER the event? Last Future Music Festival, the patrons continued hanging around (including in and around my apartment block) yelling, screaming and cheering and for hours! I could not sleep and was feeling quite ill the next day, unable to work or concentrate.

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.

see attached

see attached

ATTENTION: MEGAN FU

Dear Ms Warton,

Thank you for your letter of 6 December 2012 requesting comment on the proposed Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Precinct at UNSW.

Due to the type and scale of development proposed, the proponent will be required to obtain a Section 73 Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994. We request that the Department includes the following condition in the development consent.

Requirement for a Section 73 Certificate
Sydney Water will assess the impact of the development when the proponent applies for a Section 73 Certificate. This assessment will enable Sydney Water to specify any works required as a result of the development and to assess if amplification and/or changes to the system are applicable. The proponent must fund any adjustments needed to Sydney Water infrastructure as a result of any development.

The proponent should engage a Water Servicing Coordinator to get a Section 73 Certificate and manage the servicing aspects of the development. The Water Servicing Coordinator will ensure submitted infrastructure designs are sized & configured according to the Water Supply Code of Australia (Sydney Water Edition WSA 03-2002) and the Sewerage Code of Australia (Sydney Water Edition WSA 02-2002).

Sydney Water requests Council to continue to instruct proponents to obtain a Section 73 Certificate from Sydney Water. Details are available from any Sydney Water Customer Centre on 13 20 92 or Sydney Water's website at www.sydneywater.com.au

If you require any further information, please contact the Urban Growth Branch on 02 8849 4004 or e-mail [email protected].

Yours sincerely,
Corrine Manyweathers

Hi Object to this grossly over development for the reasons given in the Group submissions

I believe that for the reasons set out in the Errors paper that the submission should be rejected

Also the consultation with the Chinees poulation was discracefull .