CON­TRO­VER­SIAL LOWER KING QUARRY PLAN SET TO BE AP­PROVED,

Albany Advertiser - - FRONT PAGE - Tayler Neale

The City of Al­bany is set to con­di­tion­ally ap­prove a pro­posal to con­struct a gravel quarry in King River at a de­vel­op­ment and in­fra­struc­ture ser­vices com­mit­tee meet­ing tonight.

The pro­posal, lo­cated on Bon Ac­cord Road, has re­ceived 91 pub­lic sub­mis­sions, with 89 ob­ject­ing or rais­ing con­cerns.

The of­fi­cer rec­om­men­da­tion in­cludes 31 con­di­tions that are aimed at al­le­vi­at­ing pub­lic con­cerns, but if ap­proved by the com­mit­tee, it will still need to be passed at this month’s or­di­nary coun­cil meet­ing.

“Staff rec­om­mend that coun­cil ap­prove the pro­posed de­vel­op­ment, sub­ject to con­di­tions, which are con­sid­ered to mit­i­gate the con­cerns raised through the pub­lic ad­ver­tis­ing process,” the of­fi­cer re­port states.

Con­di­tions re­late to a range of is­sues in­clud­ing Abo­rig­i­nal her­itage, health reg­u­la­tions and ve­hi­cle ac­cess among oth­ers.

“The Abo­rig­i­nal Her­itage Direc­torate of the De­part­ment of Plan­ning Lands and Her­itage ad­vise de­vel­op­ers to un­der­take due dili­gence us­ing the Abo­rig­i­nal Her­itage Due Dili­gence Guide­lines to as­sess the risk of the pro­posal in re­gards to Abo­rig­i­nal her­itage,” the re­port states.

“No blast­ing of ma­te­rial is per­mit­ted as part of ex­trac­tion op­er­a­tions, un­less a sep­a­rate writ­ten ap­proval has been ob­tained from the City of Al­bany.

“De­vel­op­ment is re­quired to com­ply with all rel­e­vant health reg­u­la­tions. In par­tic­u­lar, re­gards should be paid to dust man­age­ment and noise reg­u­la­tions.

“No di­rect ac­cess to or from the site by heavy ve­hi­cles as­so­ci­ated with the ex­trac­tive op­er­a­tion is per­mit­ted via Bon Ac­cord Road.”

Mean­while, the coun­cil is set refuse a pro­posal for the de­vel­op­ment of a lime pit in Nul­laki.

The ap­pli­ca­tion aims to ex­tract 20,000 tonnes of lime a year, with scope to in­crease to 50,000 tonnes in the fu­ture.

The of­fi­cer re­port in­di­cates the pro­posal does not com­ply with lo­cal plan­ning schemes.

“While the pro­posal is broadly com­pli­ant with the City of Al­bany Ex­trac­tive In­dus­tries and Min­ing Lo­cal Plan­ning Pol­icy, it is con­sid­ered that the pro­posal is not con­sis­tent with the ob­jec­tives and pro­vi­sions of con­ser­va­tion zone CZ1, as con­tained within Lo­cal Plan­ning Scheme No.1,” the re­port stated.

De­vel­op­ment is re­quired to com­ply with all rel­e­vant health reg­u­la­tions.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.