Victory

OPPOSE the Resource Recovery Facility, Kerns Rd, Kincumber

This petition made change with 739 supporters!


SUBMISSION OPPOSING: Resource Recovery Facility, Kerns Rd, Kincumber"

GOSFORD CITY COUNCIL

______________________________________________________________________

We are petitioning that It is highly inappropriate to re-zone land to permit a large scale Resource Recovery Facility where a large family orientated housing estate is located within 150 metres of the site and there are a number of residences within 50 metres. A proposal that re-zones land to allow waste recycling plant should not be permitted near large clusters of residential housing. It is clearly inappropriate to have land surrounded by residential homes re-zoned to permit:

• Grinding and crushing large volumes of demolition waste, concrete and bitumen which creates toxic dusts,

• processing of vegetation, agri-waste food and restaurant waste to turn it into compost,

• dumping and processing of wastes such as engine oil, scrap metal, tyres, vehicle batteries and electronic waste.

I object to the proposal on the following grounds:

​HEALTH IMPACTS

1. Crushing concrete, demolition waste and bitumen is known to create hazardous and toxic dusts. Hazardous include asbestos, inorganic lead, crystalline silica and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Residents in the housing estate and surrounding properties complain of dust all over their windows and not being able to leave open their windows and doors due to the volume of dust. This dust could potentially contain many of the hazardous chemicals mentioned above. There is a very real risk that residents, children and the elderly will be exposed to these hazards on an ongoing basis if the re-zoning is permitted.

2. When Concrete, sandstone and mortar is crushed, a portion of sand is converted to crystalline silica which is a human carcinogen (lung cancer) and can cause a lung condition known as Silicosis.

3. It is estimated that 1 in 3 houses may contain asbestos. The proposed site will crush building materials. There is inevitably going to be asbestos brought onto the site. When asbestos is broken or damaged, fibres become airborne and are extremely hazardous.

4. At a meeting of residents on 18 January 2014 the owner of the quarry was asked

By a fellow resident: “can you guarantee asbestos will not be brought onto the site”?

The quarry Owner: “no one can guarantee that?” The quarry owner, admitted in an open meeting in front of 50+ people, they can’t stop a deadly material been driven past my door step to be crushed. Everyone knows asbestos kills. It would be extremely difficult to ensure asbestos is not brought on site even with the most diligent employees and processes as people try and hide asbestos.

 

5. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH’s) are a group of over 100 different chemical substances that have been shown to increase the risk of skin, lung, bladder and gastrointestinal cancers from continual exposure. PAH’s are found in coal tar, ashphalt/bitumen, crude oil, creostone and roofing tar. Bitumen and tar will be dumped and processed in very large quantities if the re-zoning is approved. Dusts containing PAH substances are easily absorbed into the human body through the skin, by ingestion and by inhalation.

It would be a very poor planning decision to allow a Resource Recovery Facility that will generate the above toxic and hazardous substances within 150 metres of a large residential housing estate and residences who are less than 50 metres from the site. Crushing and dust creation should not occur where children and families are located and this type of INDUSTRIAL activity must only be permitted in appropriately located areas and not on my family’s door step. 

6. Based on the contents of the Planning Proposal and quotes in the Newspaper, the Quarry owners openly admit they have illegally crushed and sold construction waste in the past. They have potentially made a lot of money from this. They claim they water down the dust and have noise suppression equipment. I can categorically tell you from my experience living in the street these measures do not work. I have regularly been disturbed by the noise and drone from the crushing and trucks and my windows and doors are constantly covered in dust. I wish for my local Council to protect me from illegal and harmful activity and not promote and encourage people and companies who blatantly disregard rules and regulations. It is extremely unfair and I ask you to take a stand for the community. 

TRUCK AND VECHILE IMPACTS

7. The proposal states there will be at least 100 heavy vehicle movements a day.  This will make living near the site extremely dangerous and noisy. It will be dangerous entering and exiting my driveway. It will be hazardous parking on my street carrying in groceries and getting my children in and out of the car. 

8. The minimum heavy vehicle movements of 100+ is based on the owner stating they will just be “crushing/recycling inert demolition and construction materials”. The facts of this proposal are the re-zoning will allow countless types of waste materials to be dumped and processed including:

• Mixed  construction and demolition waste

• Concrete, bricks, roof tiles

• Bitumen and Road Base

• Soil

• Vegetation, prunings, timber

• Matressess

• Electronic Waste

• Empty Gas Bottles

• Scrap Metal and White Goods

• Vehicle Batteries

• Used Engine Oil

• Tyres

• Agri waste and food/restaurant waste

• General recyclables- cardboard, paper, bottles, cans, plastics

The ACTUAL vehicle movements will potentially be 100s and 100s per day when you consider it will not just be trucks that will use the site. You should not re-zone land that will direct large volumes of heavy vehicles and cars to access a site by a single residential street to carry out a full scale waste recycling operation.

9. The road to access the proposed site is a normal, single access, residential street. When resident’s vehicles are parked on the road (which is very common) there is not room for trucks to use the road. The road gets even narrower towards the opening of the quarry and as you approach the hill you cannot see what is coming over it. GIVEN THE SITE IS ONLY ACCESSIBLE BY DRIVING THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL ESTATE AND IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IT IS CLEARLY INAPROPRIATE to be re-zoned.

10. It is not just Kerns Rd and Ballorok Rd that will have large trucks and a huge increase in cars  roaring along the street. If the land is re-zoned there will large trucks and additional vehicle movements re-directed to along the already congested roads  along Avoca Drive, through Terrigal and Green Point. The traffic is being directed into built up residential areas and this type of activity needs to be located nearer to main roads and freeways.

REJECT NOW BEFORE THE DA STAGE WHILE YOU CAN STILL PROTECT THE COMMUNITY

11. S117 (Direction 6.3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act effectively means Council will not be in a position to restrict what activity the land owner  is allowed if the re-zoning is permitted. For example, if the owner states at present they only intend “crushing/recycling inert demolition and construction materials” if in one month’s time, they decide they wish to:

·       process the engine oil that is dumped to re-sell the by product;

·       or build a composting facility; or

·       generate energy from the gases and water treatment methods they  use;

it would be difficult for Council to stop this, as those additional activities are permitted under the zoning. So while Council may try and restrict the types of waste recycling, the land owner will simply apply to the Land Environment Court and they will have a very good chance of being permitted to carry out the additional activity as the land will be zoned to allow all types of waste recycling. Accordingly please reject this proposal now and not proceed to the DA stage.

 NOISE AND STENCH

12. The type of activity that involves industrial crushing, heavy vehicles and machinery is very noisy. I should not have to put up with that type of activity and noise in my home. A Resource Recovery Facility allows composting to take place. That will create a stench that should not be anywhere near where people live.

IMPACT ON LOCAL SCHOOL AND SPORTING FIELDS

13. Kincumber Public School and Frost Reserve Sporting Fields are located approximately 800metres from the site. It is inappropriate to have crushing and processing and waste dumping taking place near areas where children are outside playing for long periods of time.

 LOSS IN PROPERTY VALUES

14. Homes owners will suffer a huge loss in property values.  Why should I be exposed to unlimited financial loss when I buy my home next to scenic protection land only for it to be re-zoned and turned into something I could never imagine happening. It is incredibly unfair. I could lose half the value of my home or more.

CONSISTENCY WITH ZONING

15. Council allowed the land that I purchased to be subdivided so I bought into this neighbourhood. It is unconscionable to turn around and change the zoning. The trucks, noise, dust and industrial crushing will ruin the value of my family home.

ENVIORNMENTAL IMPACTS

16. The proposed site has the waterways which form Saltwater Creek and Avoca Lake running through the site. There are many native wildlife species which maybe be effected by having materials crushed and washed from the site into the waterways when it rains, given the very steep backing of the site. You should not risk harm to the environment and need to find a site that does not have threatened rainforest and rare habitat.

SPRINGFIELD QUARRY CONSISTENCY

17. The site is even closer to residences then the Springfield proposal that was rejected. The closest residence shares a boundary with the Kincumber site and there are a number of properties within 50metres. The housing estate is less than 150 meters from the site. If you insist upon having a recycling plant PLEASE KEEP IT AWAY FROM RESIDENCES.

The proposed Springfield Quarry Recycling plant was for Council use only. This site is for public and private use on a far bigger scale. Springfield was not intended to be used anywhere near as much as this site. I ask that Councillors be consistent and by rejecting the Springfield proposal you must reject this proposal..

We submit that Council:-

1. Reject the proposal to rezone the land;



Today: Kerns Road Movement is counting on you

Kerns Road Movement needs your help with “OPPOSE the Resource Recovery Facility, Kerns Rd, Kincumber”. Join Kerns Road Movement and 738 supporters today.