Smeaton Grange Waste Facility

I object to this application going ahead based on the noise and smell it could create both in the short term and the long term.

I wish to strongly object to the Resource Recovery Facility application number SSD7424 because of the noise it will create both day and night. I object because I am not satisfied that the unmanaged pollution from dust particles as well as any litter that the wind will blow will not leave the facility. I am not satisfied that the applicant can assure us that there will be no long-term health risks for living so close to this facility.

Application Number SSD 7424

I object to the proposed Resource Recovery Facility at Smeaton Grange.

I believe the site is not suitable for that activity and the activity is not suitable for the surrounding areas. This facility requires an area that will suit their operational needs and 52 Anderson Road was a poor choice.
I object based on the pollution leaving the site from wind-blown items and dust particles, as well as noise and lighting leaving the site. I am concerned over the environmental impact on routes coming to the facility and the environment around the site. I object because I am not satisfied that the applicant will be able to manage all of these concerns so close to a residential area over the long and short term.

I wish to object to the proposed waste facility at Smeaton Grange.

I would like the deciding bodies to understand how inappropriate this site is to even consider having garbage tip (resource recovery facility) located so close to homes.

How can the deciding body guarantee that the facility will not impact on the daily activities of people living so close? The smell, dust, noise is obvious, both on route to the facility and on site. The proposal confirms they will be accepting demolition wastes, how can they guarantee that not one dust particle of asbestos material would leave that site? Especially when they have already said they would be accepting rail ballast which has asbestos. The proposed management of Lead paint is also a concern.

i object to the Application number SSD7424 based on the concerns I have for the smell, dust, lead, asbestos that might leave the facility as well as being transported on route to the site.

The reason why I am objecting to this proposed resource recovery facility is because I am not confident that the facility will be managed every day for the next how many years without creating offensive smells, dust or noise (day or night).
I am concerned over the management of the lead and asbestos. Therefore I strongly object.

I wish to submit an objection against this waste facility or the Resource Recovery Facility at Smeaton Grange, the reason is based on the risk of it impacting our family with noise day or night, dust and litter on windy days, and the high-risk material like asbestos. Not just onsite but as the material is being transported through the local and busy street.

I object to the proposed waste facility because it will be too close to homes.
In regards to moving, dumping and sorting metals and concrete I am worried that the noise will travel through many streets, regardless of the time.

I object because of the noise that the facility will create. This includes the noise of the material such as metal and concreate, being transported to the site, offloaded, reloaded, sorted and stockpiled. The noise of the machinery, moving skips bins, running noise of the facility and the noise from visiting vehicles.

.

I object to the resource recovery facility moving into the end of our street because the facility is not appropriate for the area. It is too close to homes. We are concerned over the dust and smell.

I object to a resource recovery facility going in at Smeaton Grange because of pollution and additional road congestion.

I object because of the pollution it may have on my families health.

I object for health reasons. Our family suffers from asthma. The proposed site is very close, we are sensitive to changes in the air. We also object to this going ahead based on the operational noise the operation during the day and night. Plus the pollution it will bring to the area, such as litter being blown around from uncovered loads and from stock piles on site.

I am writing to express my objections to a recycling facility in Smeaton Grange. My family resides in Currans Hill and my two children attend activities and Childcare in Smeaton Grange. The increase in traffic trough Smeaton Grange is of greatest concern to my family. Entering and exiting driveways in Anderson Road is already troubling and increased truck traffic on this street will be disastrous. Visibility with Parkes cars is currently problematic and adding to this will only increase the risk of an accident. In addition to the increased truck traffic, noise and smell whilst my children attend Childcare and are outside in our yard is of grave concern.

I object because of the impact this will have on surrounding areas, the impact from pollution, noise, health, traffic and the impact the facility will have on the natural environment.

This site is very close to our home. I do not want the profit making business approved for that site. When I am at home I do not want to be affected by its operations. This includes my concerns on pollution, noise, health, traffic and the environment.

This proposal is very close to our home. I do not want the profit making business approved for that site. When I am at home I do not want to be affected by its operations. I object on the grounds of the pollution, noise, health, traffic and the environment.

The roads are already over congested. The extra heavy vehicles travelling to and from this facility will increase the safety risks on the road, especially with any loads that are not secured. I object to the pollution this will create both on site and off site.

It will be too close to residential areas and the childcare centre. Plus the forecasted traffic for that facility will further add to the stresses of traffic congestion in the area.

Safety issues, pollution and road congestion.