Smeaton Grange Waste Facility

The reason for my objection is over health concerns.

This application should be rejected based on the grounds of having health concerns for people. Plus the concern for producing all types of pollution such as pollution caused by transport, processing, storing, moving. Especially when the waste material is faced with extreme wind, rain and heat conditions.

In regards to the Resource Recovery Facility Application Number SSD 7424, I have safety and health concerns about the facility that may impact on the people who already live there.

Has there been any toxicology reports to confirm that if the fine particles can be toxic to people or animals over an extended amount of time? How can having a waste facility so close be a healthy environment? I object to the application based on health concerns.

I would like to object to the application going ahead based on the concerns I have over how it could impact my health. This includes transporting waste material through built up areas and operation and sorting of waste material on the site over many years.

The culture of business making a profit and disregarding the rights of people to live peacefully in their homes is one to be taken seriously.

Health concerns

The reason why I am objecting to this application is because the potential risk to our health. Plus any pollution caused by the facility to waterways, green areas and air quality. I also have concerns about transporting so much waste and the risks that it carries through a high residential family area.

Consideration should be given to the long-term impact on the environment and the increased risk of accidents of having unsecured loads along Anderson Road, Narellan Road, Hartley road.

This facility just does not fit in with the surrounding homes, shops and parklands etc. It brings with it pollution of many types, especially being out in the elements of wind, heat and rain. It brings increased traffic risks to the culdesac of Anderson roads with private trailers and cars trying to turn and navigate between heavy trucks. It brings the noise of operation and transporting waste. I object based on pollution, noise and the impact on the environment.

The noise that will be created by so many vehicles travelling to and from the facility will have an effect on those who work in Smeaton Grange. As too will the pollution blowing from the site. Especially the waste that either drops off vehicles before arriving or when on site.

I object to the noise this facility will create plus the pollution caused by the nature of the business. The impact on areas such as damage to the roads, road safety and the impact from waste contaminating the natural environment.

Noise
Pollution
Environment

These are my three reasons why I think this application should NOT be approved for that particular site at 52 Anderson Dr Smeaton Grange.

I strongly object to the Resource Recovery Facility proposed for development in Smeaton Grange. This proposed development is in close proximity to residential areas and child care centres and facilities. It would be negligent of the Government to approve this application due to health and environmental concerns. There are homes within 100 meters of the proposed site. Increased noise, traffic and pollution is of great concern. Kenny Creek, a catchment area for the Nepean River, runs past this site. I fear that this waterway will become contaminated and have a huge impact on the animals that inhabit this conservation area. It is home to many species of animals, not to mention the contribution to polluting the Nepean River. As a mother I am very concerned about the impact on the health of my children. With the grinding of steel and concrete etc. the air will potentially become polluted with fine dust particles that will attribute to future respiratory related problems, also these particles entering swimming pools and polluting the water in which our children swim. In the disposal of building rubble there will always be the potential for quantities of asbestos to be present. Health problems attributed to the presence of air bourne asbestos fibres is already well known and well documented. This hazard alone should be the reason why this facility must not be built in Smeaton Grange. I strongly urge the Government to reject this proposal to build the Resource Recovery Facility.

I Object to the DA application for the resource recycling facility at Smeaton Grange. Again we see decisions made with out any concern of the impact to the local residents and I am wondering if this recycling facility would go ahead if it was near their houses.
My reasons for the objection:
(1) The loss of value to the houses in Currans Hill
(2)We have a heritage protected creek that WILL be affected
(3)The protection of wildlife, the impact of having air pollution from both the proposed galvanising plant and the recycle plant
(4)Stored timbers this could have the potential of attracting Termites have seen this type of storage meany times in my 23 years in the Pest Control industry
(5) The impact of the facility traffic will have on Hartley Road.This is already a nightmare trying navigate your way around these ares last week i had to replace a wind screen on my car because of rubbish falling of trucks.
(6) They will except trucks 24 hour good luck Currans Hill getting a good nights sleep and who will compensate the family who loses a family member when they fall a sleep on the road.
(7) Quality of the water in private home swimming pools

The reason why I object to this proposal is because of increased traffic particularly from heavy traffic that will affect my business. I am also concerned about the impact of lead based paint and the possibility of asbestos dust that may be included in waste.

The reason why I object to the proposal is because I am shift worker and am worried about the noise the facility will create during the day. I live 300 meters from the site. Will the daytime operations on site create sleep disturbance for myself? I am also worried about the airborne dust particles and larger litter polluting the area.

The reason why I object to the proposal is because I am worried about our environment. We need to be sensitive to what type of ecological system is already here and make our environment ecologically sustainable. This does not mean creating a garbage tip next to the Kenny Creek and the Native Vegetation of the Cumberland Plain Forest Remnant, creating a dumping ground for waste materials, concrete and foreign botany plants. We should protect the environment that is already flourishing here and protect it and not put it under any more pressure from a profit making waste facility that may pollute the area more.

I object to this proposal because of any sudden or loud noises that can be heard on site or the noises involved in transporting the waste. I am concerned about any dust or fumes going beyond the boundary. As well as the increased traffic on Hartley Road and how the traffic will be ending up at 52 Anderson Road. That seems like a high volume of traffic for that area.

I object to the proposal because of the dust that could leave the site boundary. I understand it is said there would be sprinklers however, who manages the sprinklers outside of business hours when unexpected weather rolls in?