Mixed re­ac­tion to en­vi­ron­ment re­port

Kwinana Courier - - News -

PROP­ERTY de­vel­oper Sat­ter­ley has wel­comed a re­port by the En­vi­ron­men­tal Pro­tec­tion Au­thor­ity into the buf­fer size for ur­ban de­vel­op­ment in Mandogalup.

But the Kwinana In­dus­tries Coun­cil (KIC) slammed the re­port, call­ing it “flawed and com­pletely in­ad­e­quate”.

The EPA in­ves­ti­gated po­ten­tial sources of dust im­pact­ing air qual­ity in north and north-eastern Mandogalup.

The ex­ist­ing Kwinana Buf­fer in Mandogalup was based on a fixed dis­tance from the edge of Al­coa of Aus­tralia’s baux­ite residue dis­posal area (RDA), im­me­di­ately to the west of the area.

Re­leas­ing the EPA’s ad­vice, chair­man Tom Hat­ton said the po­ten­tial for health and amenity im­pacts from dust var­ied across the area and was pri­mar­ily dic­tated by winds.

The re­port found there was neg­li­gi­ble health risk and low like­li­hood of un­rea­son­able amenity im­pacts in the eastern area. But there were po­ten­tial sources of dust af­fect­ing the north­ern Mandogalup area, within and out­side the area.

Sat­ter­ley Group chief ex­ec­u­tive of­fi­cer Nigel Sat­ter­ley said the re­port reaf­firmed the com­pany’s po­si­tion that there were no ad­verse im­pacts from Al­coa’s op­er­a­tions.”

“Sat­ter­ley, along with other af­fected land own­ers and res­i­dents, have been wait­ing many years for a fair, in­de­pen­dent in­ves­ti­ga­tion and we com­mend the EPA for their pro­fes­sion­al­ism,” Mr Sat­ter­ley said.

“We will now spend time re­view­ing the re­port find­ings in de­tail and plan­ning the bal­ance of our land­hold­ings. We look for­ward to work­ing with the WA Gov­ern­ment with im­ple­men­ta­tion of the out­comes of their in­ves­ti­ga­tions.”

KIC di­rec­tor Chris Oughton said the re­port had “ex­tremely lim­ited terms of ref­er­ence”.

“The EPA re­port com­pletely ig­nores other im­por­tant amenity con­cerns such as noise, odour, light, vi­bra­tion, vis­ual amenity or risk,” he said.

He said a sig­nif­i­cant por­tion of the area falls in­side the West­ern Trade Coast boundary which is a key in­dus­trial driver for the WA econ­omy and only 50 per cent de­vel­oped.

“If sup­ported by the Gov­ern­ment, we be­lieve res­i­den­tial de­vel­op­ment in the WTC area is likely to lead to fu­ture land use con­flicts,” he said.

“An in­dus­trial area in­creas­ingly con­strained by the on­go­ing in­tro­duc­tion of sen­si­tive land uses will ad­versely af­fect the econ­omy of the State.”

The Week­end Courier con­tacted Plan­ning Min­is­ter Rita Saf­fi­oti for an up­date on the is­sue but did not re­ceive a re­sponse be­fore go­ing to print.

But she told the ABC fur­ther mon­i­tor­ing was needed north of the Al­coa site and there was still work to do be­fore fi­nal de­ci­sions were made.

“I've had some pre­lim­i­nary dis­cus­sions with my agency and have asked for very de­tailed ad­vice,” she said.

“I want to work with other min­is­ters and the Premier on a good out­come that supports in­dus­try but doesn’t ster­ilise land that doesn’t need to be.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.