Deep Creek Quarry

I support this application.
Good Project, Good Proponent.
And well considered layout and overall development.

Will provide a good source of jobs & investment - and most importantly a good reliable quarry materials source.
Definitely should be supported and approved in my opinion with the biodiversity offsets + rehabilitation as conditions of consent.

I object to the development of Deep Creek Quarry. Reasons why I object to this proposal are all related to traffic and road conditions.
The Bucketts Way is barely able to keep up with the traffic it currently has, Mid-Coast Council and Port Stephens Council are always behind on maintenance, after any rain event there is always blown tyres and cracked vehicle rims due to pothole washout, this will be majorly exacerbated with a 2.4 fold increase in heavy vehicle traffic.
From here on -The italics are taken out of the EIS the non-Italic is my response/observation.
With reference to Appendix K –Traffic. There is a lot of flaws in this statement just a few are highlighted below, the numbers have been manipulated in such a way that the report gives a satisfactory report into traffic and intersection delay, which all users of the road know is not satisfactory.
-In 3.2 it states “The Bucketts Way……Near the site it is a two lane two way sealed road with approximately 3.2 metre travel lanes and varying sealed shoulders from 0.5 to 1metre wide”.
There is many sections of The Bucketts Way that have no sealed shoulders and I have measured lane widths of 3.05 metres at Limeburners bridge and 3.1metres at several sections near Fords Road not 3.2.
-In 4.0 “table 2” states a 2018 hourly vehicle rate with the words “The Bucketts Way North of The Pacific Highway 264vtph” of that “8%” are heavy vehicles = 21 heavy vehicles per hour
-In 9.0 it states an expected maximum hourly vehicle rate with the words “6 AM –7 AM & 3.45 PM to 4.45 PM♦50vtph (quarry) + 10vtph (employees) + 2vtph (service/ visitors) = 62vtph”
That’s an increase of 50 heavy vehicles which = 23% of total vehicles per hour and a more than double (2.4 times current rate) of heavy per hour!
-In 5.0 it states from the RTA “Table 4.5 assumes the following criteria 3.7m traffic lane width”
The Buckets Way does not have lane widths of 3.7metres, in section 3.2 its already stated lane widths of 3.2 metres which is also a lie as I have measured lane widths of 3.05 metres, they’ve used the wrong guide to traffic generating development, is there a different guide?
In 6.0 Table 3–Sidra results-The Pacific Motorway/ The Bucketts Way intersection
Is completely flawed as it states “Data for the modelling was obtained by Northern Transport Planning and Engineering (NTPE) through manual intersect counts during non-school holiday periods within the defined peak hours” . Data collection must be done in school holidays this is when The Buckets Way gets a large increase of traffic due to vacation traffic. To add to this, the figures stated were counts made in 2018, but ever since coming out of lockdown 2021 The Bucketts Way holiday and Saturday morning traffic seems to have doubled due to the vacation traffic especially Covid purchased caravaners this is another cause for a proper, just, independent count in current times.
The Pacific Motorway/ The Bucketts Way intersection on specific holiday times has delay times of several minutes not “17.5sec” as stated on page 14- Table 3. This is a fact you could ask any Bucketts Way resident and they will agree if not tell of longer wait times. What is interesting when I read through Movement Summaries in attachment D, I do see average delays of 163 and 853 seconds! but these are not put in the summary in section 6.0, Hmm curios?

So if you use the RTA’s “table 4.2 Level of service criteria for intersections” once delay times reach 52 seconds the intersection is “At capacity, requires other control measures”. There is no consideration of the fact that the heavy vehicles turning right out of the Bucketts way are heavier and slower to accelerate which will further exasperate wait time at an already choked and dangerous intersection.
In 10.4 it states “Greg Baird & Associates undertook a Road Safety Audit (RSA)” raises many issues, but these seem to answered with “It is expected that the issues raised with respect to the Pacific Highway/ The Bucketts Way intersection would be resolved as part of the current TfNSW works on the intersection” it is expected?? is not a satisfactory answer with any issue in regards to road safety! This really is a life and death matter; the community has lost 17 members through road deaths at this intersection since 2016!
In the Road Safety Audit the Limeburners Creek bridge is mentioned, this the narrowest section of the Bucketts at 6.1m north and south combination width. Currently it’s impossible for 2 trucks to pass without hitting mirrors. (A 2.4 meter wide truck has mirrors that overhang .35m each side making 3.1 x 2 = 6.2m.) In the report it also mentions the lack of compulsory signage on the bridge at time of report.
The above mentioned RSA also mentions “insufficient delineation reduces the visibility of the bridge and railing and may increase the risk of run-of- road crashes colliding with the older style bridges railing.” With 2.4 times the amount of wide vehicles on the bridge the chances of horrific double heavy vehicle crashes are increased 240%. God help if one of those heavy vehicles was a school bus with 65 primary school students.
In conclusion, I believe with so many inaccuracies and blatant lies, within this report, I believe a new independent assessment has to be made with correct figures, measurements and new counts of numbers (Inc. holiday periods) and especially wait times.
Yours sincerely and concerned,
Local father of 3 school children, local High School teacher and Deputy Captain of local RFS.

The proposed 'Deep Creek Quarry' does not meet the basic tests of 'common-sense'.
1) Distribution - the proposed site is approximately 12kms inland along the Bucketts Way from the M1. The route from the departure point of the development to the highway intersection can only be classified as 'ordinary road' conditions. There are sections of the road that are in complete deterioration as most of the road is built across swamp country - it is in such a state that there will be collisions and deaths. The Limeburners Creek Bridge was built to accomodate horse and cart and is completely inadequate for the proposed amount of truck movements - there will be a death here! The main road is narrow and there is no mention in the proposal about how the local school bus will dodge the trucks. The exit onto the M1 is totally inadequate for large scale truck movements. If you approach this intersection on a Friday you'd know! Pre-long weekends it's an insane place. Post-long weekends it's out of control. If this proposal is approved please make a condition of development that there are several helicopter rescue sites carved out along the bush edges of the Bucketts Way. Preferably, subject to there being a complete road upgrade to accomodate the increased heavy vehicle traffic incorporating off ramps on and off the M1. It will only cost about $250M. I do appreciate that the applicant will say truck drivers are 'contractors', but the reality is that they are responsible to ensure all aspects of their operation are safe.
2) Water - there are are a number of issues that are not adequately addressed in the applicants submission.
Firstly, the the proposition that an 'old farm dam' will be the water supply for dust suppression illustrates that there is no seriousness in the operational risk management. Two years ago we were in a several year drought, the water table, the surface waters and dew were non-existent. When we have a drought, that's when it's critical. At the moment this issue is ignored because we've had a bit of rain. But, Australia is a dry continent and it's predicted that there will be severe and longer droughts. There are no detailed calculations to support their dust suppression activities and if they meet industry standards? And, how do they propose to obtain this water?
Secondly, the Zoned Deep Creek System flows into the Karuah River, the river is a major oyster growing area. The proposed development is criss-crossing Deep Creek on several levels, haul roads, stock piles and extraction - effectively it's right in the guts of the creek. The control of sediments is a critical aspect and adequate measures to prevent discharge into the creek system needs to be above the highest levels as to ensure that these oyster farms are not effected.
Thirdly, water is critical to the local residences. We obtain all our water from our roofs and it's critical to our health and well-being. Dust and airborne contaminates are a big risk with this development.
3) Blasting - 25 times a year - it is as if it's going to be a fire cracker show!
Noise - this has been brushed off as if it's irrelevant. Please revisit this section of the proposal.
Vibration - this has been brushed off as if it's irrelevant. Please revisit this section of the proposal.
The Rock in this shelf is extremely hard and those who live along this rock seam need to be assured that should their properties/homes be damaged that there is a compensation package available to compensate for the damage. A $7m bond should be part of the development conditions.
4) Health and Well-Being
Several residents have raised issue how this development will effect their health and well-being. There is the gentleman who's property adjoins the entrance road of the proposed development who suffers from lung problems and is hypersensitive to diesel fumes. There is the fear that this development will decrease property values of those boarding the development and with the number of residents who attended the briefing at the Limeburners Creek Hall it is clearly evident that there is mental anxiety. The majority of people who moved into the local area did so to get away from 'developments' and to live nice and quietly in the country.
5) Economic Benefit
- Communities
I note that Bulahdelah is mention as a town that will benefit from this proposed development.... I'm sure that the author of this part of the proposal doesn't really know where Bulahdelah is located other than on a map! If you travel 12kms along the Bucketts Way after leaving the proposed gate site at the development and turn right and head for a further 50kms north you will find it, or you can do the trip over the mountains travelling West from the proposed development, its 33kms, but takes about the same time as the highway route. There is no way there will be an additional sandwich sold at the local takeaway as a result of this development going forward.It just won't happen!
- Jobs
18 during construction and 10 ongoing - on the balance of probability most of these people will be from Newcastle. There will be no, or very little use of local labour.
- Supplies
As I understand it the company owners already have businesses and established supply chains. They won't be using local contractors or suppliers.
To advocate that these statements are incorrect I challenge the proposers to commit to percentages of workforce and suppliers who would be engaged within 20kms.
6) Initial development construction
It is proposed to walk the large equipment in along Forest Glen Road - why can't these pieces of equipment be moved to site along their proposed haul road once its constructed? If this is approved it'll be the biggest stab in the back to the local residents to witness this procession of giants along their small access road.
7)Future acquisition
Should the property that has the Deep Creek Road within it's confines be acquired it should be made a condition that it be subject to a separate DA process
8) Communications
The consultation process by the consulting company has been a 'bullying process' of hired guns.
A tiny flyer was inserted into our mail boxes alerting locals, then the promise of a questionnaire which was delayed several weeks followed by a zoom conference that was chaired as if "we are here to tell you what's happening" and basically shutting out the feed back process. This was cleverly thought out because they held the first one mid morning when most people are at work and the second one was in the evening and to ensure there wasn't much input the evening session participants had their micro phones muted! Plus, they were advised that internet and mobile reception in the local area is worse than in a third world country - we don't have NBN, we don't have ADSL, we hardly have working landlines and the mobile towers are blocked out - we are literally in the black hole for telecommunications. Not once have they been to see the residents directly effected.
9) Wildlife
In the reports the local Koalas are unbelievably referred to as 'not an important population'. You've got to be kidding! I'm gobsmacked at this statement. This illustrates just how contemptuous the management team who have signed-off on this proposal really are to our national effort to do as much as humanly possible to protect our threatened furry friends. A detailed study must be undertaken by professionals who have an understanding of the koalas to ensure a proper assessment is made.
10)Flora
There are a number of threatened species mentioned in the submission - its okay to just bulldozer another bunch over! That's the conclusion of the report!
11) Bushfire
I don't believe that this has been addressed in the proposal.
Reviewing the layout of the proposed road system there is only one way in and out of the back bush block. When we consider the potential risk of bushfire and exit strategies they haven't been addressed. There needs to be a review of this layout with a by-pass road road system to enable workers to escape via an alternative route. Plus, consideration of emergency shelters as we live in a high risk bush fire zone.
I'm against this proposal on the grounds that it doesn't make common-sense to undertake such an activity in this location. It impacts materially on the everyday lives of the local residents and delivers no benefits to the community. Go figure, why would we want it? If this development gets approved, it proves to me that we are not serious about our responsibilities about ensuring a sustainable future. Here, the rubber really does meet the road and it's time that we got over the obsession to develop every nook and cranny to satisfy the 'old economic' model based on resource consumption at all costs and move to a sustainable model as the scientist are telling us we must do NOW.

I am objecting to the proposed Rock mine on at 279 Deep Creek Road, Limeburners Creek on many and varied grounds.
Further details will follow.

I object to the project for the following reasons:

1. GREEN FIELD. I understand the need for quarry materials in the Hunter. However, there are established quarry operations that can be further developed to provide for this need without the environmental, social and other impact that a greenfield site in a very quiet rural area poses.

2. BUCKETTS WAY. Bucketts Way road is an extremely under developed transport route for the massive amount of commuter, holiday, business and heavy haulage traffic that it is currently exposed to. The road is poorly designed for the swampy sugrade on which it is constructed and consequently is very dangerous due to its deteriorating state and its dimension that means that a vehicle leaving the paved surface at speed is highly likely to roll over or collide with large trees, very often (long and recent history shows) resulting in fatality. A number of school buses use this road daily and the hazard to life is significant now, let alone with the proposed additional 110/day heavy truck movements. The narrow and poorly aligned bridge across Limeburners Ck and the poorly designed intersection to the Pacific Highway are particular black spots without adding a higher loading of quarry trucks.

3. KOALAS. This region is known to have a significant koala breeding population. I have observed this in my time as a resident. Suitable koala habitat is under significant pressure from the expansion of residential dwellings in the area and the removal of trees to allow a greenfield quarry will add a significant burden.

4. SOCIAL. The neighbouring properties to the proposed development are comprised of stable family units that deliberately moved to the area to enjoy the serene, quiet landscape that has been offered to date. The approval of this development will drastically impact on that intent, with no benefit to the local community. The mooted 100 jobs will more likely be filled by commuter employees, given the current demographic profile.

Thank you for your kind consideration.

12/12/2021

To whom it may concern,
I am writing with concerns I have in regard to the haul road that is proposed to take place on Bucketts Way.

My brother moved to Allworth for reasons of his health and to be able to prolong the effects that his diagnosis has on him. He has previously had to sell up 2 properties which he thought would be forever homes. This property he now lives on has been a blessing for his health and being able to live a life he deserves like any other person and close enough that family can visit.

I have watched his health deteriorate due to diesel poisoning and it is heartbreaking to watch. He has always been a very active person and lives life to the fullest but given the current diagnosis this has slowed this down for him. When on the property he can enjoy the life he has created over in Allworth but has to limit the time that he can come to Singleton to visit family or go into town to do the normal everyday things that need to be done, this is because of the fumes from diesel and the cars on the road, he gets extremely unwell and will be like this for days after having to visit towns, this is getting worse as time goes on.

It breaks my heart that he isn’t able to be at those special occasions due to health but also makes me happy that he has the property he lives on that we can visit and enjoy the precious family time that everyone deserves.

The impact that this road will have on him is detrimental and will not have positive effects on his already failing health. The trucks that will be coming down the road and the diesel fumes will leave him confined inside his home and that is not a life for anybody and especially a man that enjoys being active. For him to have sell up and move would not be good on his health but also trying to sell the home for what he has put into it as well as trying to find something that is closer enough to family and the quality of this property is not an easy job.

I strongly object to the haul road and would hope that consideration can go into the people within this area and what effects it will have on them all.

As a frequent visitor to the area I object to the project on a number of reasons, but primarily due to the projected truck movements on Buckett's Way - a road which is already of questionable safety and the site of many traffic accidents.
I also anticipate the project will have numerous other impacts on the area including but not limited to decreased air quality due to dust and particulate matter, noise impacts, pollution of ground water and the flow on effects of this into the Karuah River and Port Stephens.
I can not think of any positive aspects of the proposed development which would mitigate these likely issues

I object to the proposal SSD-11591659, see included my summary of objections PDF document

I strongly object to the project as my mum and dad live right next door to the proposed area. It is a lovely quiet place to visit and it will not continue to be that way if the project goes ahead. I want it to be a place that my children their grandchildren can enjoy for the many years to come.
More importantly I more then strongly object to the project due to my dads medical conditions (if you require further information please contact me) and the detrimental impact the project will have on his health and ability to do anything around their family home.
Please consider these thoughtfully.

I object to the project as it will destroy koala habitat and adversely effect the koala population.

Firstly, 4 weeks is not enough time to fully assess the EIS and so we reserve the right to make additional comments later.
We object to the development for the following reasons.
1) Community Engagement. In the letter dated 19/2/21 from the Department it clearly states the effective and genuine community consultation must occur. We had been provided with DL leaflets referring us to the quarry web site which could not be found using 3 different search engines. The online engagement did not allow for participants to voice concerns/questions. Had to write them and some where not addressed. Often our comments were dismissed as “within the guidelines or meets existing requirements”
2) Nosie (Operations) The base line used is totally unsuitable for the area. Having a monitor 150m from Bucketts Way, recording slightly higher levels than the EPA baseline and then deciding to use the EPA figure (App Q p8) is not reflective of the area. Our current back ground noise is the occasional tractor and wild life. The tables in App Q p 19-20 show that we will hear constant noise all day, every day throughout the project. Some days being worse due to weather conditions. This is will have a very detrimental effect on the amenity of our lives.
3) Volume of truck traffic. The EIS p139 states average of 55 (laden) truck movements a day, therefore averaging over 12 hrs, that is equivalent of 8 movements(in/out) per hour. EIS p139 also states that dispatch on an ordinary day is likely to stop by 3 pm, therefore there will be 18 trucks movements per hour (in/out) This significantly increases the difficulty and danger of entering Bucketts Way, noise levels and emissions.
4) EIS p 136 concludes that the existing road surface is adequate for the volume of traffic proposed. Close inspection of the road will show a patched road that often is not the minimum width for a 2-lane arterial road. These patches cause trucks to “jump” adding to the increased noise levels. See attached pictures. This combined with the estimated peak flow of trucks will add considerable volume to back ground noise. Road works over the past 20 years have shown that rebuilds last less than 12 months and thus will worsen with increased truck numbers. This is because the road is built on a swamp.
5) EIS p 106-9. Using the figures taken from the air pollution monitors based in Mayfield and Beresfield and “slightly” adjusting them to provide a base of the quarry area is pointless. The average evening reading from Mayfield on 12/12/21 (Sunday) was for PM10 19.47ug/m3 Suggesting an annual back ground for Limeburners Creek is 18.8 is excessive. All figures of the impact of accumulated particle emissions we would consider to be irrelevant
6) The EIS p 139 is not clear regarding buses. It has not taken into consideration the school buses, of which there are 4 (8 daily runs) and the daily Transport link service, going south at 8am and returning around 6pm.
7) Dust. There is no reticulated water in Limeburners Creek and we exist on rain water collected in tanks. Even the smallest particles have a potential to pollute our water with crystalline silica which is a carcinogen.
8) Wildlife. The report admits to a significant koala population on the site as well as many other mammals but suggests that killing these can be offset by money (buying biodiversity credits)
9) The Limeburners Creek bridge is not safe for 2 truck/large vehicles because of its’ narrow width. It is narrower than the road either ends of the bridge. There have been near misses over the years with the current traffic load. I personally have damaged a wheel rim trying to avoid an oncoming vehicle. This sort of incident can’t be found in any data so cannot quantify how to mitigate the risk.
10) Bucketts Way/Pacific Highway Intersection: There are already 50 to 100m queues at more than just the peak hours to turn right onto the highway from Bucketts Way. The updated left turn lane into Bucketts Way is now even more dangerous as you cannot see if the road is clear beyond a left turning vehicle to be able to turn right. This and the potential increase in impatience after having to queue will encourage riskier behaviour to turn resulting in more accidents. There is no blend lane when turning left onto the Pacific Highway so trucks from a standing start are slow, so needing larger gap to safely enter the highway, thus increasing wait times at the intersection, which again could lead to riskier behaviour.
11) Employment. Only maximum of 10 FTE jobs are envisaged. This will be less than the income destroyed for the present eco-tourism venues.
12) A conservative estimate of $5-$10 mil has already collectively been wiped off the value of properties in the area from the lodging of this EIS, which is a major social and economic impact for land holders
13) Water management: The 2 existing farm dams proposed will go nowhere towards reducing dust and collecting polluted water. The inevitable escape of polluted water to Port Stephens will threaten the long-established oyster industry at the mouth of the Karuah River.
14) Blasting: No mention of the very common ironstone in the area was made in the geology report and this will mean the vibration from the quarry could travel a long distance.
We have great concerns where an EIS is commissioned and paid for by the developer seems to produce lots of favourable outcomes when the facts included or left out suggest otherwise
2) Noise (Operations). The acceptance of 35db(A) as the base noise level is totally unacceptable for the majority of the identified receptors. For many the background noise would be close to 0db and even then the noise is associated with short term farming activities (tractors) and wild life which is a desired back ground noise. Blasting, crushing and lorry movement all day is not. According to Appendix Q page 19-25 the majority of receptors will be subject to continuous day time noise. This will drastically changes the current amenity value noise (EIS page 99).

I wish to OBJECT to the proposal for the new hard rock quarry in the Limeburners Creek area. My key concerns relate to:
- the noise and vibration generated by the quarry
- the quarry's detrimental impact on air quality, local traffic, the local water supply
- the negative and irreversible impacts on the local biodiversity - specifically the local Koala population
- the unwelcome visual amenity.

This project needs review at a higher level before progressing – a more detailed objection will be filed at a later date.

I object to the Quarry ,for a number of reasons.i have waited 20 years for the place we brought . We brought here because of the peace and quite .My grandparent live here for may of years .Also for the fresh air Not for the noise and the blasting of the ground around us . My kids live here and grand-kids as well.Because of the beautiful wild life and animals as well that live here.It is a prefect place to raise kids in a small community .Everyone nose every one.
My concerns are what it will do to the environment and the water way that most of the creeks run into like Karuah river as well.Also my closest neighbors Has a Diesel allergy.
AND it will Kill Him if the quarry goes through .Just by the Diesel and the Dust .Also what about the land around the quarry it will not be worth anything at all .This property was brought for us and my kids and grand kids to be safe . there are to many thing to name why it is a bad idea for a quarry in this area .
At the moment there is not many stops at all to pull over to the side of road if needed to .For the amount of trucks that will be going up and down the Bucketts way it is to busy and the road is not the best most of the time . During the long weekends and holidays you can not get out of the Bucketts Way at best of times .Then you add more trucks to that and school busies and logging truck and its not a good spot at all .

I have lived here for years and do not want the quarry any where near my house.
The explosions will be horrible enough let alone the increased traffic. God knows how anyone is going to get over the bridge at Limburners creek safely if there is a logging truck one way and a quarry truck the other.

I believe the increased traffic flow of heavy vehicles will mean rapid deterioration of the already crumbling pavement on the 12 km to the Pacific highway and to Stroud and beyond in the other direction.
The difficulties with gaining access to the Pacific highway during peak daily and holiday periods will be further exacerbated by more heavy vehicles needing to “take off” from this busy intersection.
I am also concerned with more heavy vehicles using the Bucketts Way comes the increased risk of collisions especially at the narrow Limeburners Creek bridge and around the numerous bus stops that convey school students to and from their destinations each day.

To whom it may concern

As a long term resident of Limeburners Creek, I vehemently object to the proposal to build a quarry in the vicinity of Deep Creek.
A summary of my main concerns are outlined below.

Given the ridiculously short timeframe that DPIE have allowed for responses, I will submit this abridged version of my objections with a view to making a more detailed submission which I will forward to you in the new year.

OBJECTIONS:

- Severe and real threat to public safety due to the proposed number of heavy vehicles (many hundreds per day) servicing the quarry along Bucketts Way. This road is currently and historically in very poor condition. Motor Vehicle Accidents and fatalities are distressingly common. Numerous government declared Black Spots exist on this road. The gazetted speed limit on this road is 90 k/p/h. Trucks and other road users frequently exceed this limit, tailgate and overtake in a dangerous manner. Accidents involving quarry servicing vehicles will inevitably result in severe injury and death to themselves and other road users.

- Pollution from the quarry will involve toxic discharge into Deep Creek which I personally use for recreation - kayaking, swimming, nature and bird watching.
Deep Creek is a tributary of the pristine waters of the Karuah River which flows into Port Stephens. The proposed quarry site is merely a few hundred meters upstream from where Deep Creek enters the Karuah River National Park. Large areas of this waterway in the vicinity of the quarry are listed as Habitat Protection Zone and Karuah River Sanctuary Zone as part of the Great Lakes Marine Park. These estuarine environments are important habitat and breeding grounds for a myriad of animals - mud crabs, flat head, bream, oysters, prawns and tortoises. Dolphins are not infrequent visitors to the Karuah River catchment, upstream from where Deep Creek joins the Karuah River.
Oyster farming industries will be directly impacted from polluted quarry discharge into this system.

- The noise and vibrations and dust from blasting operations and extensive use of heavy plant equipment and processing operations will directly impact my property and the properties of scores of other residents in the area. This is highly distressing, given the peace and serenity which has existed in this area forever. The unspoilt nature, quietness and pristine qualities of the air and water will be negatively and irreversible impacted if this quarry proposal is approved.

- Alledging that the quarry will provide 10 jobs can hardly be held up as a social positive. The numerous eco tourism accomodation businesses, food producing and oyster farms in the area will be adversely impacted. This could potentially result in the loss of income and livelihood for a far greater number of people.

- Habitat destruction, bushland clearance and waterway pollution will have a profoundly negative impact on the flora and fauna in this area. Two weeks ago we had a koala on our property. Another was sighted by our neighbours on their property within the last two months. Friends from Gloucester who were bushwalking, bird and wildflower watching in the Karuah National Park at Witts Road (directly opposite the proposed quarry haul road area) photographed a koala in winter this year - 2021. While not a random controlled trial, this is clear anecdotal evidence that this area provides extremely important habitat and breeding ground for koalas.
Powerful Owls reside in this area. I was woken by one calling at 02:00am last week. Any approval given for tree removal and habitat destruction related to this quarry proposal should be viewed as criminal.

On balance, the hugely negative impacts on local residents and existing businesses, flora and fauna, waterways, habitat and air quality can not possibly be justified by the approval of this quarry. The catastrophic effects of the proposed increase in heavy vehicle traffic on Bucketts Way associated with this quarry proposal will result in motor vehicle accidents and the inexcusable loss of human life. Whovever signs off on this proposal will be directly and personally responsible for such deaths.

Have visited friends in the area on many occasions and cannot imagine the disruption of this quarry to their peaceful existence. Half a million tonnes of rock per year? Insane numbers. Needs a rethink me thinks.

Firstly I thank you for the opportunity to oppose the proposed quarry at Deep Creek known as Ironstone Developments.
I searched for 20 years for my piece of paradise and 10 years ago I found it along the Bucketts way at Allworth.
I chose this area for it's quiet rural aspect and clean air.
Thru out my working career (Maintenance Fitter) I have worked in several open cut quarries. In such sites as, and not limited to, Brandy Hill, Lovedale, Balickera, Penrith and Karuah.
I understand that I may be afforded the opportunity at a latter date to elaborate on my objections if required, therefore I will be brief at present.

My reason's for objections (in no particular priority) listed below;
1) Noise... As stated I have worked in and on crushers so I know of the constant noise created by crushing rock. The constant drone off electric motor and the engine noise of plant and equipment.

2) Dust... Living on tank water collected from rain water and being less than 2.5km North East of the project airborne particles will contaminate our usable water.

3) Truck Movements... The Bucketts way, although a major road, is in an appalling condition. I feel the added stress on the road will only compound existing problems, such as pothole breakouts, accidents due to roadway condition and narrow bridges as well as congestion at the intersection of The Bucketts way and The Pacific Hwy.

4) Environment... Koala habitats, Kangaroo's, Deep Creek emptying into the Karuah river's Oyster leases...Etc. Etc. Etc.

5) Land Values... How will this quarry effect my land value? And how will compensate for any loss?

6) Land Use... My future plan was to utilize the rural aspect of the area to provide a "Farm Stay" style retreat for others to enjoy. This would not be possible if a quarry is permitted within 2.5km of my property.

And last, but by no means least,
7) Health.... Not only for myself and my family but I have a close neighbor that has a Hyper Allergy to diesel and with the constant truck movements along his property line his health will deteriorate dramatically. Also nobody can guarantee what contaminants may be exposed when opening up the earth.

Attached is my objection letter.

As a local resident and business owner (Ma Baker, Booral) that uses The Bucketts way on a daily bases I am opposed to The Deep Creek quarry adding extra load on this road.
And as a first responder I fear the accidents that may occur due to the added truck movements on the narrow bridges and poor road surface.
I also worry about the line up to enter onto the Pacific Hwy at the Southern end of The Bucketts way.
I am also opposed to the Environmental effects this quarry will have to its surrounds.
I have witnessed Koalas crossing from The Karuah State Forest toward the quarry site on occasion.