Sancrox Quarry Expansion Project

I am a neighbouring property and there are alot of truck movements as it is.
The dust from the plant is more than enough now.
The noise and ground shaking.
Would not make it a nice place to live.
Allowing this to go ahead would ruin the properties around it.

I object to SSD 9946 and have listed my objections in an attachment

Dear Sir or Madam,
I oppose the Sancrox Quarry expansion as currently proposed for the following reasons:
1/ Operation hours - are stated as 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Due to noise generated I believe 24 hour operations at this site, close to rural residential areas, is inappropriate.
2/ Water use - The EIS states that dust will be mitigated mainly through the use of water. We are experiencing water restrictions at this time, and the excessive use of scarce water to suppress dust in dry periods is inappropriate.
3/ Emissions - Excessive fossil fuel emissions, including a high level of carcinogenic diesel emissions, and bitumen fumes
4/ Loss of vegetation - The proposed expansion of the site is significant and will result in the loss of habitat for a number of local fauna.
Thank you
Marcus Ludriks

I object to the expansion of the Sancrox Quarry as it will strongly impact on my home and the environment around me including the wildlife.
The noise and dust pollution will affect all the residents and animals that chose to call this area our home. The Koala population has been decimated in this area due to the recent bushfires so they can’t afford to lose any more habitat. I hope you take my comments into consideration when deciding on this issue.
Thanking you Jan Stone

Major concern of noise pollution hours of operation and devalue of properties in surrounding areas

With the beautiful tranquil community that has been built in the Thrumster and Sovereign Hills area, the last thing that is needed is an expansion of a quarry creating dust, noise and potential health impacts. In light of recent events in the area with fires, we don't need more forestry demolished, more wildlife habitat destroyed and negatively impacting the environment. Being so close to a housing area, surely the noise and pollution would not be good for the community, little alone the nearby schools, child care centres and future generations.

Re: Hanson Heidelberg Application SSD 15_7293 for a New Quarry at Sancrox NSW
I am the owner of Lot 16 DP 776681, Le Clos Sancrox. My land is located proximate to the proposed new Sancrox quarry. I am aware of the Hanson Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on exhibition until 12th December 2019 and I am quite concerned that the Statement fails to address issues under the categories I have listed here in my letter.
I wish to object to the proposed quarry expansion – ERM Reference 0418291 (Environmental Assessment and Planning Act 1979). The current proposal seems to contain myths, omissions from the EIS, inconsistencies and unwanted impacts for local residents, business and future residents.
The proposed Sancrox quarry application has been presented as an expansion project. This appears to be incorrect as it would be more accurately described as a new quarry. The proposed expansion is to be located on a new Lot and DP and all plant is to be moved, and therefore it would be best described as a new quarry, especially given that the existing quarry was to be closed last century.
Port Macquarie is one of the fastest growth areas in NSW and all future development is to the west, it has less residential Lots than it has quarry rock. Hanson describe the resources found in their existing quarry and potential new quarry is in short supply. What they fail to disclose is the true number of quarries located in the local area with the similar material. Hanson claim they don’t own other resources in the area, but infact they own Lot 2 DP 814356 at Milligans Road, Bago were there are ample Reserves closer than the 200km claimed in their submissions. This quarry also contains high quality rhyolite daicite. Hanson claim that transport costs will be excessive because of 200km haulage distance. More accurately the supply from Bago is only 20km from Sancrox, so this would be negligible.
My land is part of an estate of some 51 Lots of approximately 2 Ha each. I, with a group of lot owners, are currently in the process of working with the local Council to have our land rezoned to Residential, from the current Primary Production (Primary production on this land has failed and it has been deemed by Council that Residential would be the best outcome for the city). PMHC indicated they would not support an application for Rural Residential land, as was originally presented to them. The Council advised that Sancrox land is earmarked for Residential development and the adopted UGMS has indicated Fernbank Creek and Sancrox to be the next areas of investigation. I along with a group of likeminded Lot owners have been working with the local Council to begin the investigations and we have engaged the services of a local Land Development company, Land Dynamics Australia, to assist in this process.
Hanson claim in their submission that Port Macquarie has a 15 year supply of Residential land. It is worth noting that the Council has acknowledged that the new Biodiversity Legislation introduced in 2016 has meant that the estimated 15 year supply of Residential land as stated in the UGMS and referred to in the Hanson letter, may be grossly overestimated. It is believed by the local Land Development experts, including LDA, that the amount of Residential land remaining in Port Macquarie is only approx. 5-7 years. This figure is to be confirmed by a study currently being conducted in conjunction with the PMHC.
The standards we have experienced appropriately being applied at the Local level for approval of our application are rigorous indeed. Our expectation is that an even more rigorous process be applied in consideration of a State Significant Development application for a quarry in an area where there is an existing and rapidly growing residential community and, as well, a sensitive ecological zone.
When considering this application from Hanson for the new quarry please consider the attached letter with my submission.
Inconvenient Truths -
1. A core koala habitat of “high use” level exists in the centre of the proposed new quarry, as shown in the Greater Sancrox study concluded in 2015.
2. A very large portion of the proposed new pit is a “medium use” koala habitat.
a. Given the devastating bushfires currently threatening this already endangered species, now more than ever we need to protect their habitat.
3. A subregional biological linkage corridor runs right through the centre of the proposed new pit location.
4. An Endangered Ecological Community (EEC) of Flax leaved paperbark, prickly-leaved tea tree is located in the area of the new pit.
5. Significant swamp oak and mixed eucalypt open forest areas will have to be destroyed.
6. Previous studies revealed 5 hollow bearing trees for koala habitat in the proposed pit area. The EIS prepared by Hanson says there is 1.
7. Twice daily blasting will impact traffic on Sancrox Rd and may impact the Pacific Highway, every blast. How this will be managed is uncertain but there is a code of conduct for blast guarding which has been developed by the Australian Explosives Industry and Safety Group which Hanson should consider adopting.
8. Hanson has not been able to comply with the screens of trees conditional requirements for the existing quarry. How therefore will they cope with the requirements of significantly higher standard mitigation measures given the dimension of the proposed larger new pit?
9. Possibly the impacted areas cannot be contained within the Hanson owned land simply via management of mitigation measures.
10. Evidence is that the culture at the Sancrox Quarry is not capable of managing mitigation measures for existing operational conditions. There is no indication that Hanson proposes significantly different behaviours to support the management of mitigation measures in the proposed new quarry.
11. The new Sancrox quarry project will fragment and alienate land and result in conflict with adjoining land uses.
The quarry is not ideally situated. In every direction over the range of 300m – 1,300m, there is both current and potential residential development and this new proposal is not consistent with the needs for this local government area.
Omissions from the EIS -
1. No mention is made of the currently being constructed 142 Lot Rural Residential sub-division to the west of the site (Le Clos Verdun), the eastern boundary of which is only 600m from the western edge of the new quarry.
2. No mention is made of the existing houses located on Le Clos Sancrox, the nearest of which is less than 1km from the edge of the proposed new quarry and the proposal currently being considered by PMHC to rezone the whole Le Clos Sancrox as residential, the closest parts of which will be approximately 300m from the southern edge of the proposed new quarry.
3. No mention is made of any bund to the south of the last stage of the new quarry which is essential to protect anything on Le Clos Sancrox. Furthermore, will any bund be effective anyway?
4. No mention is made of the high-speed rail corridor which goes right through the middle of the deepest part of the quarry. This will require the high-speed corridor to be moved onto the adjoining land owned by Jeff Freeman.
5. No mention is made of the impact upon the Billabong Wildlife Park and Koala Sanctuary less than 1 km from the pit.
6. Hanson has not made appropriate recognition of the biological community corridor nor identified how to manage its removal and create alternatives.
Inconsistencies in the EIS
1. Page 39 of the EIS shows the bitumen plant being coal fired. Page 40 of the EIS says the bitumen plant is gas fired, therefore how can this information be relied upon.
Unwanted impacts
1. It will probably not be advisable for local residents to drink their tank water because of the dust impact.
2. The efficiency of solar panels for hot water heating and electricity will diminish significantly over time because of a build-up of dust.
3. Costs of home maintenance will increase with more frequent painting, cleaning of roof and down pipes and windows, all from a build-up of dust.
4. Local residents can expect their sleep will be disrupted from noise from the quarry 24/7. Sleep deprivation can adversely impact health.
5. The current freedom of movement of local residents may be impacted twice daily, from blasting.
6. Blasting from the current operations are already impacting on the local businesses of Cassegrain Winery and Expressway spares, as debris is regularly raining down on their respective rooves, (as reported by them).
7. There may be a higher concentration of dust particles within the air within the region for the next 10 – 30 years.
Considerations not given enough attention
1. The community need for good quality quarry material must be in balance with the social and economic costs of its extraction.
2. Port Macquarie is the fastest growth area in NSW and all future development is to the west, it has less residential Lots than it has quarry rock
3. Quarry operation within the PMHC area are quite competitive.
4. Hanson’s has not adhered to approval conditions for operations at the existing Sancrox quarry why expect a different outcome with a substantially more difficult to operate quarry?
5. A “new” quarry at Sancrox will deliver Hanson all the upside, and PMHC and existing and future communities all the downside. An approval for a “new” quarry also gives Hanson a significantly enhanced competitive position.
6. Round the clock quarry operation, blasting vibration, showering from rock and dust, noise and truck movements and the cost of dust removal over a long-haul period requires a very substantial and much more detailed / e

I wish to object to the project and my letter of objection is attached.

I object to this project with the following key points;
1. Definitely no 24/7 operation - no blasting or vibration
2. Concerns of devaluation of surrounding homes & land
3. Extra traffic
4. Land/Home owners entitled to "peace & quiet" (back to reasonable work hours)
5. Ground water pollution & use
6. All residents should be notified of this in writing not by flyer in mail.

RE: Hanson Heidelberg application SSD 9946 for a new quarry

As a landowner on Glen Ewan Road, Sancrox I wish to make a formal submission. I object to the Sancrox Quarry Expansion Project.
I am concerned about the proposed operation of quarry activities to operate on a 24/7 basis. The noise from blasting and crushing of rocks will be unbearable.
I also have concerns about the pollution and what this may do to the air quality.
Thank you for taking my objection into account.
Yours Sincerely,
George

I live approximately approximately 800 meters away from the proposed site on Bushland Drive. There is a natural water course and koala habitat running directly through my property through my neighbours and down to Sancrox road. With the devastation of the koala and other wildlife populations due to the fires and their habitat there will be much interest from local and worldwide media on this site.
Noise, smell, dust and the increase in traffic will be highly criticised in light of the devastation around Port Macquarie that has been all across the media.

Secondly the residents of Bushland Drive have lived in relative peace with the quiet existing operations of the existing non Mega site.
We highly object to the proposed expansion and will make it well known within the local community, council, government and media.

Lastly Port Macquarie has a large number of families etc moving to the area every week (I own two local Child Care Centres).
Is Port Macquarie wanting to be known for a MEGA quarry that will be situated across the highway from the proposed new centre of Port Macquarie at sovereign hills shopping estate & centre . We have got to start thinking long term. If the wind blows in the wrong direction, dust, noise and smell are going to be impacting many more residents than just Bushland Drive.

Feel free to contact me directly for further comment.

Kind regards
Chris Munro
0418966902

I object to this project. This expansion will have a HUGE NEGATIVE impact on our local environment, our already devastated Koala population, it will also have a direct impact
on our endangered ecological community of paperbark and a subregional biological linkage corridor.
PLEASE do not go ahead and let this happen. I am also worried about the dust, noise and and possible sleep deprivation it will cause local residents.
How can you let a foreign owned company destroy our environment and impact our dwindling Koala population. YOU MUST SAY NO

I write today having only recently being made aware of the proposed expansion of the quarry at Sancrox and extension of hours of operation.
I write in opposition to this on a number of different grounds:

1. Noise, vibrations, traffic: I live and work very near to the exiting quarry and we are already disturbed by trucks passing our property, dust, blasting and vibrations. The expansion would impact our family, our home, our peace and quiet and my business operations. We can currently hear the quarry works: trucks reversing, crushing, loading, we can feel explosions literally shake the earth and our house through the day and if the works were expanded and ran 24 hours a day it would definitely disturb my family and business. This noise pollution and vibrations would also lower our property value.

2. Environmental impact: The clearing of the land to expand the quarry will have a significant negative impact on our local flora and fawna that we are already seeing suffer due to drought and fires. There has been large scale clearing for industrial development and residential development around this area in the last year. There are already many displaced and injured kangaroos, possums, birds and koalas. The remaining land in a nearby property development that is zoned E2 has been completely burnt out and will take a long time to recover in the current dry weather conditions. I would also question the negative impact of the development on a larger scale in relation to our climate changing. Not only would the tree clearing have a large negative impact on moisture levels and air quality but the increased emissions from a quarry mining the environment and the activities directly related to that, has to pollute on a large scale more than it did previously.

3.Negatively Impact our business. An increase in noise (crushing, blasting and other activities) would impact us negatively from a safety and environmental aspect. I am the owner of a small horse riding centre that is in a close proximity to the quarry. Horses react dangerously to loud noises and vibrations. One of the reasons we have clients with disabilities, tourists and other clients is due to the fact that we provide a calm, safe place for people to ride. The proposed expansion and development would increase the noise and pollution we experience. My concern is that we will lose clients as a direct result and make our business no longer sustainable which would leave eight employees out of work.

Furthermore, there are many other people in this area that would be negatively impacted by the proposed expansion (College Rise which is a new, high density residential development just one kilometer down the road, my neighbours, Cassegrain winery, residents of Sancrox and surrounds) and I am not sure if they have been consulted or are aware of the Quarry’s desire to expand.

I hope you can consider our objection carefully and stop this development from proceeding.

I am extremely concerned about the clearing of 40 hectares of native bush land and the effect it will have on our native wildlife due to habitat loss. The wildlife has only just endured habitat loss from the recent and ongoing bushfires within only a few kilometers from this proposed development area. I believe that we should be preserving the native bush land that we have, not contributing to the extinction of our native wildlife.
I am also extremely concerned about the increased blasting and crushing, and proposed 24/7 operation of the rock crushing plant, and the associated level of noise pollution, ground vibration and air quality from the operation. We have purposely bought out of town on acreage to be away increasing noise levels and increased air pollution to bring up our young children in peace and good health, and this proposed development and all that it stands for is detrimental to that of a rural residential area and the effect is will have on us as the surrounding residential community.
I do not understand the need for extra crushing materials, as the Pacific Hwy has already been upgraded 100km in each direction of this plant, so the extra material extracted is clearly not for this use, nor am I aware of any project nearby that would require that quantity of materials so it’s location does not seem a viable one.

My son is ready to build a house on Verdun Rd., Sancrox and the noise, dust, vibrations & truck traffic throughout the area will be detrimental to all the new houses in this residential area. Recent bushfires make this native bushland valuable to koalas and other fauna & flora. I am against any expansion this close to a lical council approved residential area.

I wish to object to the quarry extension at Sancrox on the grounds of flora clearance and endangered or vulnerable wildlife, both under enormous pressure caused by urban expansion as well as industrial expansion. This expansion will also affect quality of life for current residents and future residents who have purchased land in the new Riverside Park estate. This degradation of quality of life will be caused by the proposed 24 hr. a day operation (light pollution at night as well as dust and machinery noise).

I'm making this submission on behalf of my elderly mother-in-law who has asked me do so as she is not computer literate. She owns land on Riverpark Sancrox Estate, Sancrox Road, NSW 2444. This is a 142 Lot Sub-division which is currently being constructed, the eastern boundary of which is only 600 metres from the edge of the proposed new quarry pit. I believe that the Hanson Environmental Impact Statement (ERM Ref. 0418291) on exhibition until 26th November does not properly address the potential issues and in fact appears to ignore and/or omit many factors that should affect the application. In fact several statements within that EIS, I consider to be grossly inaccurate.
Instances of some of the inaccurate statements, mistruths, and omissions are listed below
• Hanson states that this application is for an extension of the existing quarry. In reality it is for a NEW quarry on adjacent land owned by Hanson.
• Hanson states that there are no supplies of similar rock in the area or a quarry within 200km. That is patently untrue and in fact Hanson owns land within 20km which contain adequate high quality rock which is adjacent to a recently approved new quarry. There are also many other competitors’ quarries in the close vicinity
• Hanson states that the new quarry will not impact on any local existing and future land uses. This is a gross mistruth. Currently there are many houses situated within 300m to 1000m of the edge of the new quarry pit. In addition, no mention is made of the142 Lot Riverpark Sancrox Estate, the eastern edge of which is only 600m from the edge of the proposed new quarry pit. No mention either is made of the proposed new residential sub-division proposed on Le Clos Sancrox, the edge of which will be only 300m away or the proposed need for expansion of residential development being proposed by the Port Macquarie Hastings Council in the Port Macquarie to Wauchope corridor of which Le Clos Sancrox is the first part.
• No mention is made of the fact that there is an Endangered biological corridor (identified in 2015) which runs right through the middle of the new quarry pit nor of the fact that the new pit will wipe out a “high and medium use” koala habitat as well as destroy significant swamp oak and eucalypt open forest areas which include several ecologically sensitive hollow bearing trees.
• No mention is made of the fact that the corridor for the proposed East Coast High Speed Rail line runs right through the middle of the new quarry pit.
• No real details have been included of mitigation measures – in fact no bund is proposed to be built to protect any development to the south (i.e. on Le Clos Sancrox). Will any proposed bund be sufficient anyway to mitigate the noise and dust?
It is proposed that this new quarry (which includes an asphalt plant) operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Hanson’s previous record of adhering to good practice operating conditions (imposed as conditions of ongoing consent) with the existing quarry is not good so how, without some remarkable change in culture, can we all be sure that any local residences will not be subjected to serious noise, vibration and dust problems bearing in mind that the new quarry is situated to the east of my land and the general prevailing wind is from the east.

I am opposed to this project on mainly environmental grounds but also personal grounds as I have just purchased a lot at Sancrox to build my new home on.
I’m also very suspicious of the way this project has been kept quiet from the local community and councils. The Mayor and our local MP weren’t even aware of this project.
Firstly, I believe the few pockets of undeveloped bush land we have remaining in the area need to be maintained for native species that we have put under so much stress.
Secondly, I am building my home in a location just 2km from the proposed expansion site. There would be some noise and vibration that would impact me and other residents of Sancrox. For residents living closer to the site, I see that voluntary acquisitions can be made for their properties so I take from that the fact that the expansion of this quarry could make those properties unliveable.
The reasons for the expansion don’t add up either. The pacific hwy upgrade has been completed For well over 100km in either direction from Sancrox making the carting of product for the hwy unviable. We have Bago Quarry to the south west and Hitec Quarry at Bonny Hills on the coast to the south. This project is simply not needed for this area unless it’s for more building of housing estates on paperbark swamps and coastal swamps which also should not continue in any area not just the hastings.
Please look into this project further and make public the real reason for the expansion.
Thank you for your time.
Regards. Mike.

Please see attached submission for Heritage Council of NSW.