Breen Resource Recovery Facility

I am responding to the proposal to expand the Recycling Facility and Marang Parkland development.

I have significant concerns about the stated traffic flow entering the facility and the impact for traffic using Captain Cook Drive. There is no mention of the number of trucks which will enter and leave the facility via the roundabout on Captain Cook Drive. If they plan to recycle around 650,000 tonnes annually, this will be carried in by around 100 trucks a day going in and 100 trucks leaving the facility (based on 25 tonnes per truck for 250 days per annum). This is in addition to the number of trucks entering Holt facility using the same roundabout. Not to mention the vehicle traffic entering Boat Harbour and the soccer fields and skate park.

The comment also that the entry to the hockey fields just down the road will impact the traffic flow into that area noting this likely to be the planned entry to the parklands. There is inadequate roadway to allow anymore then 5 cars before they impact the main roadway. if not, where will traffic enter the parklands.

Saying the trucks will enter before there is a build up of traffic from residents leaving Kurnell in the morning is naïve and short sighted without any research on the current traffic patterns. There has been considerable development of the Kurnell precinct in the last two years which has seen increased traffic flow on a single lane road at all times of the day (contrary to Breen statements) and there are plans to put in a passenger wharf to allow a ferry between Kurnell and La Perouse. this will further increase the volume of traffic.

Until there is a two lane road in and out of Kurnell, the planned overuse of the roundabout and Lindum Road should not be allowed.

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to object to the expansion of the Breen Resource Recovery Facility. In particular, I am concerned about the expansion of the site and the impact this will have on airborne pollutants and the health of individuals living in close proximity to the facility (for example, at Greenhills Beach).

As far as I can ascertain, there has been no independent study in to the likely increase in airborne pollutants and the impacts this might have on the health of people in the nearby vicinity. This includes the large amount of children who play at the nearby skatepark and sporting facilities and the kids that live in Greenhills Beach. I believe this is unacceptable for a development of this scope and size and would strongly recommend such a study be performed, and controls implemented, before this development progresses.

Kind Regards

In the same way as most of my neighbours, I am strongly against the extension of Breen Resource facilities, not so much because of increased noisy traffic (which is already bad enough), but mainly due to already unacceptable high levels of dust emissions and possible pollutants from the existing facilities. As the scoping report indicates (under 7.10 Waste Management) it is particularly in spring and summer that north-easterly winds bring high levels of dust emissions to our residential area. This is clearly visible for anybody with a swimming pool in our suburb as during this period (of at least 6 months) we need to vacuum nearly every single day brown-red dust at the bottom of our pools. And I am not talking about the dust that we regularly need to clean from our outdoor pavements or roofs. As most of our families have children who play every day in our streets, we are highly concerned about the risk and dangers of these dust emissions - and possible other pollutants - to their health .

As far as we know, there has never been a detailed assessment of the health hazards generated by the emitted dust and pollutants from Breen Resource to our adjacent residential area. According to the Wilkinson report that has been presented with the project presentation, there are presently 'no site-specific data available to determine the existing concentrations of dust and particulate matter'. This is shocking news, the nearest DPTE monitoring station is apparently based in Randwick. So while hundreds of our children are playing every day outside in Greenhills Beach and other residential areas, under the dust and particulates emitted by Breen Resource, an expansion project by the same company is being considered in the total absence of a detailed study on the health effects of present and possible future activities from the company.

According to research published on 24 may 2016 in the International Journal of Epidemiology by Oxford University Press, health is at risk for anyone living within 5 kilometers of a landfill site : 'Results of the research showed a strong association between Hydrogen Sulphide (used as a surrogate for all pollutants co-emitted from landfills) and deaths caused by lung cancer, as well as deaths and hospitalisations for respiratory diseases. The results were especially prominent in children.' The residential area of Greenhills Beach is less than 2 kilometer from Breen Resource. The company operates a commercial rather than a residential landfill. We do not know to what extent the level and quality of dust and pollutant emissions may be more or less damaging to our health, but a detailed study into the health hazards for residents living close, and even very close, to the Breen Resource facilities should be a pre-condition before any consideration is being given to the expansion of present facilities.

In the absence of the conclusions of such study, we will continue to object against the expansion of existing facilities.

I am concerned about the air quality from the existing and proposed development of the facility. I am unable to find any detailed analysis of the dust or other pollutants generated, which when picked up by the wind cover our house and yard, having a negative impact on our air quality. I would have thought a comprehensive anyalsis of the fill tipped on the site and the dust generated be completed by an independent body as a minimum to appease concern.
The increased truck traffic is also a concern given the access road is a single lane each way, and passes a local High School. Already there is a high volume of traffic for what is a local road.

See attached letter

The development of Breen Resource facilities is presenting a worrying scenario to the residents of Greenhills Beach. The dust already generated by this facility can be seen in my swimming pool on a daily basis. As a mother, I’m particulary concerned about our children who are playing every day in our streets or in the adjacent skate park while inhaling this dust of which we do not know to what extent there may be asbestos or other pollutants in it. While the company officially states it does not process asbestos, it is impossible to know what the exact contents are of the enormous masses of industrial waste that the large number of noisy trucks bring to Breen Resource every single day. It is widely known that asbestos, in the form of dust, can lead to lung cancer and severe respiratory diseases. The documents provided with the project presentation confirm - in the Wilkinson Report - that there is no detailed analysis available on the emissions and pollutants generated by Breen Resource and the degree of health hazards for nearby residents. This is shocking and the main reason why I am objecting to the expansion of Breen Resource and demanding an analysis report of the dust and pollutant emissions before the expansion of it is even considered.

Please refer to attachment, which details reasons for objection on behalf of Besmaw Pty Ltd

The comments provided are from recent meetings of the Kurnell Progress and Precinct Residents Association, more specifically an Extraordinary Meeting held on Monday 30 August 2021 to discuss the proposal. Kurnell residents were invited to submit questions which were responded to verbally by Damien Vella, CEO of Breen Group. Below are the numbered verbatim questions reflecting the concerns of the residents present:

1. Following on from last week's meeting, in relation to dust and airborne contaminants, can you please let us know what specific contaminant thresholds you need to meet during construction, and during operation once construction is completed.

2. In regard to increased traffic movement, you mentioned that the traffic report said that the Lindum Road roundabout would be able to cope with the increases. Does this take into account increased use of sporting fields and other amenities used by recreational users? If in time it is proven that the roundabout cannot cope, would you commit to creating an alternative entry and exit point to your site?

3. In relation to the fact that the parklands were meant to be happening anyway, regardless of whether the new resource recovery facility is approved, can you commit to a timeframe for the parklands to be completed?

4. With regard to trucks causing dust and grit being deposited onto Captain Cook Drive when leaving the site, you have mentioned 'high traffic roads' will be sealed. Can we get commitment that ALL roads that the trucks travel on within your facility will be sealed, not just the 'high traffic' roads?

5. Regarding Marang Parklands, There is a dead spot of phone reception along Captain Cook Drive commonly known as the ‘black hole’, between Weeney & Quibray Bay and what will be the highest point of the Marang Parklands. There is concern that with the increase of density of the hill, that the ‘black hole’ will also increase. Losing phone reception in this spot is very frustrating, can be embarrassing and is unsafe, as this is also a hot spot for car and bicycle crashes. Can Breen assist the Community in improving mobile phone reception?

6. What is being done to manage current leaching, and with the new facility accepting increased amounts and types of waste, what measures are proposed to manage this?

7. The reports detail the creation of a Neighbourhood Advisory Panel for the purpose of ongoing consultation - can we ensure that our Committee has representation on this panel?

8. As there was no indication on the flyer that went out to residents of the date that submissions were due, can you please clarify exactly when they are due, and what the next steps will be in relation to submissions received?

In summary, members of our Association are mainly concerned about dust and airborne contaminants before during and after construction, effects of increased traffic movement along Captain Cook Drive and Lindum Road before, during and after construction, and any current and future effects of leaching damaging the surrounding environment.

Any further reassurance and clarity that can be provided on these matters would be greatly appreciated by our Association.

Air Quality
The air quality report does not assess the effects during construction, which are more than double the air quality effects from the operation of the development. it should be revised and recommendations made
Using Randwick as a baseline should not be acceptable. air monitoring systems (which are already recommended for the playing fields) should be installed near sensitive receptors eg Greenhills Beach and Kurnell
Noise:
The noise Impact assessment does not consider the impacts of trucks driving close by to Greenhills, rather it only assesses the vehicles at the development site. I am woken in early mornings from heavy vehicles travelling to Kurnell. operating 24 hours will mean i will now be woken in the middle of the night.
What general waste products are being processed?

Some key points I will be submitting are on traffic flow on Lindum Rd, the "green corridor" that goes across a two lane 80 km road (i.e. not a wildlife corridor), and environmental contingency on past, current and proposed wastes being stored on this site. The parklands are an already agreed on development for the community, and we are wondering when Breen will provide what they legally are bound to do so, or will we be held to 'ransom' again on further development proposals or extensions?

Lindum Rd: In regard to increased traffic movement, it has been assumed in the report said that the Lindum Road roundabout would be able to cope with the increase use. This does not take into account the high public demand and use of this road by visitors to the area on popular days and times such as during Summer. This roundabout is already a bottleneck issue for traffic , for residents entering and leaving Kurnell, and visitors accessing other community assets and facilities via this road and roundabout. The increased use of sporting fields and other amenities used by recreational users needs to be addressed, and the Lindum Road itself is narrow , already proving issues with its use (visibility leaving and entering the roads, bottleneck traffic when large trucks need to fit past cars entering and leaving with cars parked on either side, dust and dirt etc). Specifically, the cars parked on either side of the Lindum Rd already cause issues for trucks and cars entering and leaving the Breen and Holt sites. It is also a popular access for pedestrians (the path to Boat Harbour leads directly from Lindum Road and seems to be right alongside the proposed Breen road access on the plans. This highlights a few issues I foresee - will cars be prohibited from parking on both sides , and therefore be forced to park further away at an already full capacity carpark (this whole area needs more accessible parking), or will they be forced to use another operators carpark (HOLT) causing further issues in peak periods. I presume a fence will separate the pedestrians from the trucks access road, but how safe is the pedestrian access, will the airborne dirt and dust from the entering truck be close to this path or are you removing that pedestrian access entirely (that is enjoyed by visitors and residents wanting to access Boat Harbour by foot.) If in time it is proven that the roundabout and/or Lindum Rd itself cannot cope, would you commit to creating an alternative entry and exit point to your site or contingency for works to the main road( Captain Cook ). The condition of the access roads (including the roundabout on the main road needs to be maintained for community safety and use to their suburban community facilities.

What is being done to manage current leaching (records of past materials leaching into Quibray Bay) and with the new facility accepting increased amounts and types of waste, what measures are proposed to manage this? Will there be asbestos ? Will there be testing of modern recognised pollutants such PCBS. Is there contingency plans and funds for the handover to the Council , such for future discovery of issues of leachate from the past decades of accepted waste in pits that did not have modern surface base to prevent leaching ?
Another issue is Time frame - how long will this resource recycling facility be operational, close to the ocean and Towra point protected site?

Green corridor: A wildlife corridor of various designs need to be considered, as the "green corridor" "connecting to Towra" is cut by a 80km/h two-lane road. We already see animal fatalities, and with increased road use by trucks, community members using the parkland and a "green corridor" providing a designated hotspot for animal crossings increasing fatalities.

Timeframes: Is the company unable to say how long its Marang Parklands project will be delayed? With or without the proposed application to increase the capacity of the former sandmining site and build the extended resource recovery facility, estimated dates of project completion should be provided to the community.

Finally some statements :

The reports detail the creation of a Neighbourhood Advisory Panel for the purpose of ongoing consultation. Kurnell Community Members must be on this panel, as well as local environmental community stakeholders such those from SO SHIRE and/or Sutherland Shire Environment Centre, as their homes and livelihoods and lifestyles (including health and well being) are dependent on the sustainability of this proposed extension of operations by Breen.

It seems Breen need this commercial service approved, to fulfil their original “legacy” i.e. to get the “ better” park, they need this approval to make it commercially viable and need the materials to to fill in the space! This feels like the community (Kurnell and Sutherland Shire) are being used as a leverage for continued business at the site, rather than delivering on past agreements to rehab the area. In saying that, the park looks great, and our society has to sort its waste materials from development somewhere but how does the community have to wait, bargain and what legacy will this are be left with considering the past, current and prosposed waste materials being accepted to be sorted and fill the area for these parklands.