Lack of site security major Rachel Forster meeting concerns

Action to address these problems was supposed to be taken last year after complaints to council saw debris thrown from the site test positive to brown asbestos. The test report was raised at the meeting and can be seen under Asbestos Test of Debris from Rachel Forster Nov 2011.

REDWatch has been provided with correspondence since the meeting that set out what Council required of the developer to address site security as a result of the complaints. A Licenced Asbestos Contractor has subsequently assured Council that the surrounding properties and the external site areas are free of asbestos.

REDWatch has provided at the bottom of this article the text of correspondence from Council that sets out what should be happening on the site to address site security and asbestos issues. We do this so that those surrounding the site are aware of what the developer is supposed to be doing to secure the site.

You will notice that these conditions were clearly breached when the public was invited into the badly vandalised building for a public meeting on 2 June 2012. Some people took the opportunity to wander through the building unescorted. It was noticed at this time that one of the wooden panels was no longer attached to the fence making access to the site still possible and that downstairs windows and doors have been barricaded as required by council.

Other issues raised

A range of other concerns were raised at the Rachel Foster meeting including the cumulative impact of the Rachel Forster site being redeveloped alongside the new development to the rear of Rachel Forster.

Residents of Albert Street who will be faced by more units under the current proposal are particularly concerned about overlooking of their properties. One photo montage showed them protected by new trees on the side walk but this is totally up to council.

The Approved Concept Plan proposed a public park around the existing entrance dedicated to Council. The meeting was told however that Council were not aware of the proposal and were reticent to take on the proposed park. If areas are to be dedicated to Council, they must meet council requirements and Council needs to be prepared to take them on for maintenance etc otherwise they remain the responsibility of the development and its body corporate. 

Concerns were also raised at the meeting about the changes in design and increase in unit numbers from those prepared for the concept plan. A preference was clearly articulated by the meeting that Redfern wanted good quality design and development and not cheap developments which is what some people feared was going to be delivered. A leaflet circulated before the meeting clearly raised this concern - Community Flyer on Rachel Forster for 16 June Meeting.

The current plans for the site can be viewed on the REDWatch website under Pre Exhibition Consultation (16 June 12) Documents. ABC Planning who handled the meeting for the development said they are taking into account community feedback prior to putting the plans on formal exhibition through the Department of Planning and Infrastructure.

Council Correspondence regarding Site Security and Asbestos

In correspondence from a Specialist Environmental Health Officer at the City Of Sydney the resident had been advised that:

" ... a licensed Asbestos Contractor has been engaged by Aargus PTY LTD and that their project Manager, Mr Con Kariotoglou visited the site on 20th December 2011 and met Mr William Metlej, Director of Kaymet PTY Ltd.

Mr Metlej was also present when Peter Gooch and I (Bill Potter) attended the site and met you on the same day.

The company will be fully reviewing the site asbestos risk assessment early in the new year and have provided Council with a schedule of the following interim measures, which they will complete by the close of this week:-

•  To erect and secure all boundary fencing/hoarding on all street frontages of the property to prevent unauthorised entry to the site.
•  To erect signage on all boundary street fencing warning of ‘Authorised Personnel Only’ and ‘Warning of Asbestos’ on site. Three (3) signs of each must be placed along each of the street boundary fences
• Authorised personnel only must enter the site.
• Barricade and secure all openings to all buildings at ground floor level to prevent access by unauthorised persons.
• Immediately engage an Asbestos Contractor with an AS1 licensed to remove all loose pieces of asbestos materials  from the grounds within the property and decontaminate the interior surfaces of all buildings that have been affected with asbestos materials within the site.
• The licenced asbestos contractor shall also immediately decontaminate adjoining properties which may have been contaminated by asbestos, for example to gardens and roofs of adjoining properties 146-154  Phillips Street.
• Validation sampling of soils from within the site and adjoining affected properties will be required to determine the success of the remediation work.
•  Air Monitoring around all street boundaries and adjoining properties will be required during the duration of the asbestos remediation work.
• On completion of the decontamination of the site and adjoining properties an Asbestos Clearance Certificate will be issued.

... if you require any further information, please contact Health Administration on 9265 9597 and quote the CSM number 941341 to request contact from one of my colleagues in the Health Compliance Team".

On 13 February Council advised :

“I write to confirm that the owners have provided the Council with a report from a Licensed Asbestos Contractor, who has confirmed that neighbouring properties and the external areas of the former hospital are free from asbestos containing materials.

The report confirms that there has been significant vandalism and theft from the building, which has resulted in loose materials being within the site.

However, the report concludes that there is no significant risk beyond the site boundaries and recommends that site security is improved to prevent further intrusions and for a licensed asbestos contractor to be engaged in asbestos removal when the site is eventually developed.

I have requested further information about how the conditions within the site will be reviewed and monitored prior to re-development of the building and will advise you further when more information is available.”

ABC Planning has advised REDWatch that they will make available the report into asbestos on site and when received we will post it on the website.

Source quoted above is Council correspondence dated 22 December 2011 and 13 February 2012 sighted by REDWatch.

Meeting Report by Geoff Turnbull - REDWatch Spokesperson (modified on 20 June based feedback and on sighting of Council Letter of February 13 2012).