By JOHN VAN KLAVEREN
AN application for a dangerous goods facility in Roseneath St, North Geelong, creates an off-site risk of fatality, council documents reveal.
The threat rating extended to surrounding streets but left out residents living closer to the site, the risk assessment report said.
Geelong consultany R4Risk prepared the report on the Ferro Corporation site for Teleta Nominees and Univar Australia, a chemical distribution company.
The report said an annual one-in-a-million chance of fatality required “all practicable risk reduction measures to be taken” under Victorian regulations.
“During the detailed design of the facility, additional risk mitigation options should be considered.
“Any risk mitigation measures that are determined to be “reasonably practicable” should subsequently be implemented,” the report said.
“The risk level at the nearest residents is less than one per million per year and can therefore be considered broadly tolerable.”
The report said the risk profile was based on preliminary design information and should be updated when the design was finalised to ensure compliance with regulations.
The proposal includes a tank farm, a warehouse, a blending and filling shed and a road tanker loading area.
The 15 tanks will store 620 million litres of flammable gases and liquids, 40,000kg of oxidising substances, 40,000kg of poisons, 870,000 litres of corrosive substances and 120,000 litres of “miscellaneous dangerous goods and articles”.
State Member for Geelong Ian Trezise has called on council to oppose the facility.
Mr Trezise said residents had expressed serious concerns about the safety of the proposal and a lack of consultation.
“If you were a resident who lived directly across the street, would you be concerned? I think you would be,” Mr Trezise said.
A groundswell of concern had developed as more people in the area became aware of the proposal, he said.
“It started with a dozen but has now grown to as many as 150 who have contacted me. People are seeking a way to tackle this as a community.
“The deadline for objections is this week and people want an extension of time and rightly so. We’re calling on council to extend the time for responses and outline a consultation process,” Mr Trezise said.
“People have a right to be fully informed and consulted before anything happens.”
A spokesperson said council has received 13 objections by Wednesday but would accept submissions beyond Friday’s deadline.
The council would decide whether the applicant and objectors should attend a consultation meeting, the spokesperson said.
