Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project

My name is Rodney Taylor and I have been living on my own a small property at Stanhope 6kms away from the proposed quarry. My family have farmed here at the property since the middle of the last century 1850's so I am extremely well versed with this area and its history, weather, topography and environment.
I am very opposed to this hard rock quarry on the following grounds:
Transport
Dust
Noise
Silica dust
Water
Wild life
Gas Pipeline
Weather conditions associated with blasting
Road transport within the proposed Quarry

Transport - according to EIS, there will be a proposed 220 truck movements per day. The proponent says the area has already experienced truck movements in the past however coal semi-trailers not Trucks and Dogs were used in this comparison and they travelled along Gresford road from Glendonbrook Rd, through Elderslie Road, over the bridge over the river and travelled to a rail siding dump at Branxton from the old Great Greta mine. These truck numbers never really exceeded more than 20 from my experience and at the time there was far less traffic from the general public than there is today. It's a silly argument when we compare the two. Yes, trucks carried coal to Branxton siding 30 odd years ago. Parents drove their kids to school as there were no school buses in those times.
It's outrageous to expect residents to coexist with a one lane heritage listed bridge as the only crossing between Singleton and Lochinvar.
The bridge has always been such an important crossing and as a resident I don't want to lose it when it has to be frequently closed for maintenance from the additional traffic that the proposed quarry will cause. As it is with general maintenance, it becomes an inconvenience accessing Branxton. It's said these trucks will carry 50 ton loaded but these trucks will handle 80 tones easily. Will there be a weighbridge? The EIS states that if everyone abides by the road rules everything will be ok however the present road user's system is only just working satisfactorily however I am very concerned that the trucks, who will be dependent on time tables, will do likewise.
It is no secret that the numbers of motorists and motor cyclists on the roads have increased over the last very few years greatly. This will only further increase as development in new houses and the subdivisions planned.
This can only continue as developments and people flood to the area so to propose that it’s ok to have so many trucks, flies in the face of reality. This project is said to last for 30 years which sounds better than the 50 years as was first muted. All at the same time one only has to expect large rises in private vehicles and a myriad of other vehicles supporting these other developments. Residents notice the huge rises in road users already, so what numbers will it rise to in 30, 40,50 years time?
The roads were not designed for such heavy trucks on the bridge either and constancy will cause residents grief in maintenance. And repairs. The road from Elderslie to Branxton already has double lines for much of the distance. There are few parking areas anywhere along this proposed haul road to Branxton. An observation was made that maybe the entire road should be given to the proponent and let the State prepare another route for the public or maybe develop the rail corridor along following the rail line and bridge over the Hunter, which was originally proposed by the mine proponents of a second open cut coal mine at Mitchells flat. In this situation, the trucks who left early for the coal mine were causing too much noise. So, they were limited to leaving later for their loads from Great Greta mine. The result was that the haulage trucks were lined up on the road between the Elderslie bridge and the corner waiting for the defined time which caused problems for school buses. My concern is that this exact situation will happen again.
Another concern of mine is dust. After living here for almost 73 years, August three predominate windy directions westerlies South Westerlies and North westerlies all affecting Stanhope strong westerlies winds have always plagued the Hunter Valley . If they come later in the cycle will blow dry westerlies winds till Christmas .
The North westerlies will blow dust over my place and along the mountains as my property lies directly south east of Quarry . Those who live in the area live with tank water already polluted by mines this project will be far worse with blasting . What will happen if the prevailing winds prevail for weeks on end will that be considered as no blast weeks ?
Even coal mines are asked to observe these events to reduce dusting . I didn't find any evidence in the EIS of any considerations including no blast weeks. They must be huge blasts contemplated to produce the results needed to satisfy even a 50 ton payload for 110 trucks 5500 Tons per day 33000 per 6 day week, providing it's not 80 Ton truckload or how much heavier with smaller graded crushed gravels are needed. The EIS used wind evidence from Cessnock airport and Rutherford airport as evidence of wind in the area which I think shows the sincerity of the proponent. This evidence has no bearing for here in Stanhope. This district has mountains which the other sites don't, and that alters the wind readings, meaning some turbulence from the mountains will change direction and strength.
This proposal is a large one and, if allowed, will be real and a burden for us who live here This venture will become an environmental disaster for the communities health as well as the ecology of fauna and flora.
Nothing in the EIS gives me any confidence of good outcomes. The quarry owners or whoever might administer this don't seem to believe they have any restrictions which need to be in place for bad weather, they’ll just quarry on. Another consideration is the amount of really thick fog, which also happen in the mornings between strong wind times and as highs move over the area awaiting the next front. I have seen nothing regarding weeks of winds from the North westerlies interfering with blasting or indeed operations. I’ve seen nothing in the EIS about fogs so thick they are referred as pea soup with visibility so bad making a country Road really dangerous, particularly with traffic on the bridge being the heaviest over the river.
This is a country area at this stage. Sound travels so easily and clearly, even the sound of magpies, peewees and butcher birds delight me as sounds of peace every morning, These sounds can be taken for granted but this quarry with be so noisy. 2010 trucks will be noisy both empty and loaded.
The crusher or I'm told crushers, will be dealing with hard rock. The very running of bulldozes and graders etc. will amount more noise than we have ever experienced ever before.
This project will need copious amounts of water to keep dust controlled on internal roads. The proponents original statement that said he was converting water from irrigate crops license to another classification has been now aborted and not happening. He says water from dams will be used for dust suppression however this is a phurfee as there is no volume in dams in the vicinity to water the haul roads, let alone total working environment, especially with drying climate change. Many are presently dry in dams or partially filled with rain water.
In the E.I. S its stated Stanhope Creek was noted but the rest of the water courses simply titled tributaries. My main water comes from Dutton's creek which flows into Stanhope creek before the water enters the Hunter River . While Dutton's creek is an intermittent creek however in normal times, it flows water to the cattle on my property . Dutton Creek headwaters center around this Quarry and is essential to my operations. The creek runs right though the proposed site at the base of the mountain so no matter what happens, it has to be compromised from blasting carrying particulates down stream, running through my property . I have had issues getting permission from Government departments even being allowed to dig down in the sand to have stock water so Dutton's creek is of significance to me, with volumes of water escaping in times of rain events in large volumes, but generally is a running stream . It sounds better to say it is a tributary, it sounds better then a named creek for this development but nothing stated in the EIS appears to discuss how damage to the water course will be avoided . Presently the creek is not running but that is an exception rather the rule . If it were not a listed water course and a mere gully powers that be would not have so many rules.
I am concerned that the amount of wildlife and trees affected by this quarry will be great. Blasting and operational noise will drive these animals somewhere? Where? These mountains have their own ecosystems, and I would contend many endangered animals and birds will be the cost. I’m no expert but it's plain to see they will have to deal with the dust, the noise, and will be lost to this area.
The gas pipeline is a fundamental reason to stop this development. God help us if blasting causes faults to the line and the adjoining steep country of the mountain will be a catalyst to a wildfire like no other if a fire along the pipeline develops. The mountain is part of a chain that splits a road heading to properties that have been developed over the Durham peek. If allowed to happen, it cuts the entire community off as the road is one road in and one road out. As you’re already aware, I hope the gas pipeline will commence from Queensland and is earmarked but travels directly through a number of proposed pitsfor this quarry. Surely if this quarry is approved it cannot coexist with a gas pipeline . This proposal is causing lots of anxiety among locals . What we have is lots to put up with a
For no personal game only the heartache.

I support the development because it will provide a vital resource in an area where there is and will be significant growth and associated demand for construction materials. The location is also close to transport infrastructure (Hunter Expressway), so it can address similar demands in Sydney, Newcastle and the North coast too. The cost of construction is increasing at a significant rate due to a number of factors, some of which are economic factors outside of Australia's control, so it's important that we take advantage of any factors that are within our control such as supporting the subject development.

We object to the Project and hold significant concerns for our family and the safety of the local community and other road users if this project is approved. This is not an appropriate location for a large, long-life hard rock quarry.
The project is located in a quiet rural area. The project site is connected to major transport routes via relatively narrow country roads passing through rural and residential areas. The proposal involves costs and risks to local landowners and the community which are far reaching, permanent and have not been fully assessed. These impacts for neighbouring landowners and those along the proposed haulage route include loss of amenity, loss of real estate value and considerable and unacceptable traffic and road network impacts that extend far beyond the Project’s operational footprint.
We are landowners in close proximity to the project area. Our property boundary is approximately 1000m from the project site. We are identified as Receiver 3 in the Noise and Air Quality Impact Assessment Reports. The engagement with local landowners, particularly those directly impacted by the project, has been completely inadequate.
We have had no contact from the proponent during the preparation of the EIS to discuss the EIS results for our property, including the noise, air quality or traffic assessments. This is despite our property being very close to the project and identified as a ‘residential receiver’ in proximity to the project in the noise and air quality assessment reports. Therefore, we were not afforded the opportunity to consider and discuss the study results with the Proponent, nor have any input into impact mitigation, prior to public exhibition. For a project of this scale, this is unacceptable and there is an obligation on the proponent to undertake meaningful engagement with affected landowners prior to the lodgement of the EIS.
Traffic is a key concern for ourselves and the local community. The traffic assessment concludes:
Therefore having carried out this Integrated Transport Assessment for the proposal, it is recommended that the proposed Quarry at Lot 5 Springvale Road, Elderslie, NSW can be supported on traffic grounds as it will not have an adverse impact on the local road network within the vicinity of the site and complies with all requirements of Singleton and Cessnock Council and Transport for NSW (TfNSW).
We are a family of six, with 3 school age children. We travel along Stanhope Road and then on to Elderslie Road into Branxton multiple times every day transporting our children to school, sports and other activities and local events. We know this road network very well and are at a complete loss to understand how the traffic assessment can conclude that the Project will not have an adverse impact on the local road network within the vicinity of the site. This is baffling considering there will on average 110 laden trucks per day and up to 30 laden trucks per hour.
The proposed haulage route is crosses the historic one lane Elderslie bridge (where delays are already frequent) and through residential areas associated with Branxton and its outskirts. The road network is not up to the conditions required for truck movements. There are bends, hill climbs and pinch points (Elderslie Bridge, busy road intersections). The associated noise, safety risks and inconvenience for local road users have not been appropriately considered or mitigated. For example, truck movements will result in substantive further delays at Elderslie Bridge at hill climbs and intersections in Branxton. In particular, the intersection of the old New England Highway through Branxton and the A43 New England Highway is already hazardous. Furthermore, the sheer volume of truck movements will result in degradation of road pavements and increase the risk of interactions with local traffic and serious road incidents.
This is not an appropriate location for a hard rock quarry and the supporting road network is completely unsuitable for the proposed haulage of product to markets.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry at Elderslie.

I have resided at Fairview 422 Elderslie Road Branxton since 1997. This is within 5km of the proposed quarry. We have elevated views over the area where the mine is proposed.

We experienced the traffic from the Great Greta Colliery (GGC) which closed in 1999.

In 2002 we opened a tourist accommodation on the property, “St Peters”. This quarry project has the potential to make our current desirable location an undesirable destination.

I believe this project is not in my interest or the community’s interest for the following reasons:

• Public Health and Air Quality: I am deeply concerned about the production of fine dust and silica particles from drilling, blasting, crushing and general mine operations. This poses a significant respiratory risk to my family and accommodation guests.
Appendix I states “The modelling predictions for the Project do not indicate any exceedance of the relevant dust impact assessment criteria at the residential receptors”. This modelling has been completed by Todoroski Air Sciences Pty Ltd who are acting for the applicant. The report itself states “TAS relies on and presumes accurate the information (or lack thereof) made available to it to conduct the work” which indicates it may not be accurate and needs professional independent evaluation.
Table 19 refers to Drill. No definition of the drilling process has been made available for the evaluation of the accuracy of the report.
Traffic and Road Safety: The predicted increase in heavy vehicle movements detailed in appendix L on the proposed haulage root described is floored and unacceptable. These roads are not currently constructed to accommodate the volume of the proposed heavy haulage traffic.
The school bussed currently drop children in the morning and afternoon along the route, the bus stops along the Elderslie Road are not all constructed with correct signage and verge delineation as it’s just a country road. The road is only single lane in each direction. The verges are not constructed in a manner that a vehicle can safely be undertaken. This was very unsafe when the GGC haulage was happening even though a curfew was placed on the haulage during the hours the school bus operated. This is an unacceptable safety risk to the children and drivers.
Clause 16 says “Appropriate measures will be implemented to ensure drivers exercise heightened caution in these areas and strictly adhere to all designated speed zones, particularly those associated with school zones, bus stops, and locations where school bus activity occurs” This does not take the current conditions into account, offers only small upgrades and therefore is an unacceptable risk.
Figure 7 & 8 are supposed to show a typical picture of Elderslie Road. Unfortunately, a significant amount of the road does not have compacted edges and regularly the tar seal fails when wet conditions prevail.
• The Historic Elderslie Bridge: This bridge was not constructed for this type of heavy haulage. When the GGC was operating, up till 1999, it was a 2 lane Bridge, it is now a 1 lane bridge. Since this time the traffic has increased significantly and already lengthy waits are experienced to get on the bridge. I question the accuracy of Clause 13 of appendix L. The damage to the bridge and additional delays will be far more than the applicant’s prediction and are unacceptable.
• Noise and Vibration: Constant noise from hard rock drilling, blasting dozer and excavator activities will severely impact the quiet character of our rural-residential area and may cause distress to livestock and pets. This noise will make our accommodation unattractive and will have an adverse effect to its ongoing viability. I have read some conflicting information about the size of the earth moving equipment ie the size and method of drilling equipment is not specified. The 40T and 80T excavators, D9 dozers. Will the equipment be fitted with noise suppression as an open cut coal mine would be required to located this close to domestic housing? The modelling in appendix H appears to be in favour of the applicant and needs to be checked by an independent professional.
• Environmental Impact: The proposed of land will destroy critical habitat for threatened species as detailed in 6.1.3 of the EIS. The vibration and noise will have a detrimental effect in particular to the Large-eared Pied Bat and the Brush-tailed Phascogale.
• Water Quality: My property relies on rainwater for our domestic use as we do not have town connection in the area. I am concerned about potential contamination of the roofs from dust collection and accumulation. The mine will exacerbate the level of contamination we will experience. This will have unacceptable increase risk to our health as we collect our drinking and domestic water from our roofs.
• Social and Economic Impact: This quarry will lead to a decline in visual amenity and property values in the area. There will be little economic benefit to the local community compared to the permanent loss of lifestyle and inconvenience. It has the potential to discourage tourists and visitors from coming to the area and making our accommodation unviable ongoing concern.
• Hunter Gas Pipeline: It is clear from Appendix V of the EIS that an agreement between the applicant and the Pipeline has not been reached. This needs to be resolved prior to any further progression of the application.
I urge the Department to reject this proposal in favour of protecting all of the effected land owner’s quality of life and our community’s health.

I object to this project for the following reasons:

Traffic/Infrastructure:
- Increase in road traffic noise due to proposed 220 truck movements a day. The EIS is inconsistent; it is 220 truck movements in one place then goes up to 240 truck movements in another. There is no mitigation in the document like double or triple glazing as offered to residents in previous proposals for an open cut mine near Mitchells Flat.
- Drop in house values for properties along Elderslie. Searching on RP Data confirms a busy road has a negative effect on property prices.
- Suitability of Elderslie Rd for this traffic. Without this traffic the road near Radford Park has had maintenance in the past 4 years alone.
- Suitability of a 130+ year old Historic Listed bridge for a haulage route. It may have a 50T limit but where is the control that only one truck at a time is on the bridge. Cameras would be required in addition to traffic lights.
- No alternate haulage route. Elderslie Rd has been closed several times, once for flooding in 2022 and at least 3 times for fallen trees taking down power lines. All between Maitland St and Radford Park entry.
- Distorted comparison of the haulage route proposal with Elderslie Rd being used by coal trucks 25 years ago (which is now carried by rail), the number of trucks then was around 30 – a quarter of what is proposed now.

Environment:
- The Biodiversity Impact statement doesn’t show much research for fauna in the months September, October and December; checking for Koalas in March and April is well outside breeding season. The company, Wedgetail said they weren’t engaged in the project until later in the season when they took over from another company apparently sacked by Mr Pittman. What is Mr Pittman is trying to hide?
NOTE: Santos who are working on a gas pipeline going through the proposed quarry property also conducted environmental studies in September 2024 and found several threatened species in their proposed gas corridor, the Powerful Owl, Grey-crowned Babbler and Koala to name a few.
- Pollution of creeks and Hunter River. There is a dam on the subject property near the proposed mining area. This feeds some creeks and then flow into the Hunter. Silicon dust from rock crushing will collect in this dam and flows to the Hunter. Farmers use this water for their stock and irrigation of crops.

General:
- The Santos gas pipeline will intersect with the Bluestone Quarry. Mr Pittman seems to be aware and already has mentioned a $50 million price Santos would have to pay for compulsory acquisition of his Bluestone Quarry if the pipeline goes ahead as planned. Which taxpayers will end up paying for one way or other.
- Australia has few mountains. Why so we need to take down another? At least an open cut mine we can use for water storage when we’re finished with it.

My Objections to Bluestone Quarry.
I live on Stanhope Road around 6 kilometres from the proposed quarry. My family depends on tank water for domestic use. I am quite concerned about the dust and other nasties which will come from the blasting and wind blown from the quarry. We already have to put up the mine dust but this will be closer and have more effect on our water and our health.
I also travel into Branxton 4 days a week some weeks more. To travel into Branxton with 220 truck movements along a country road with double lines 90% of the way is terrifying. This past week we have had very heavy fog. On Tuesday at 8.50am I was heading into town. I approached the Elderslie Bridge lights on ⅓ of the way across the bridge and a truck didn’t give way and we both ended on the bridge..what is going to happen with all these trucks on tight timelines. How many lives are going to be put at risk. Elderslie Bridge is over 100 years old. Last year alone it had 6 weeks of repairs with lights just with normal traffic.
If I travel vis Lochinvar onto Branxton it would be a trip of 36ksf opposed to 12ks..
This route also has school buses in the morning and afternoon. The whole route has several dangerous intersections .One Stanhope Road Elderslie Road Stanhope Road having give way signs..onto Maitland Road passed lots of children at a bus stop along Maitland Road catching school buses into Lochinvar 2 schools and Rutherford HS. When they reach Wine Country Drive a very busy corner to turn right to progress onto the expressway . This particular intersection has had many accidents not to mention the round about where the dreadful bus accident occurred 3 years ago. Funny that has not been mentioned . Trucks coming off the expressway will have to contend with cars heading into the ever growing subdivision of Huntlee.
I have lived here for over 50years and I have seen the amount of traffic using Stanhope Road increased significantly. The subdivisions from Maitland area travelling up the valley to work and home again. Car clubs on their runs sometimes 20-30 cars and not on weekdays. Ulysses bike club often come through. Mostly stopping off at Branxton for a coffee or meal at the local establishments.
Santos conducted Environmental Studies for The Hunter Gas Pipe Line September 2024 and found several endangered species . The Tangory Reserve is right next door to proposed quarry.
Santos also recorded Koala calling during their mating time..
With dust all over the vegetation the noise from crushing machine to trucks around the quarry to the blasting what is going to happen to these endangered species along with the Kangaroos that inhabit the area.
For reasons I have outlined I urge you to decline the application for Bluestone Quarry. I believe the environmental issues along with the haulage route , endangered species,this proposal needs to be declined.
Carlene Taylor
469 Stanhope Road.
Stanhope. N.S.W.

- concerned for the safety of children getting on and off buses along Elderslie Rd.
- danger to pedestrians walking along Elderslie Road where there is no footpath and very narrow.
- danger to traffic along sidestreets pulling into Elderslie Road due to the increase of truck traffic.
- no detour available when Elderslie Rd floods.
- dust pollution in our area
- extra deterioration of Elderslie Road due to the increase of heavy vehicle traffic.
- loss of value to our homes due to noise, air and traffic pollution.
- please take these concerns seriously and seek an alternative route for the trucks to use rather than Elderslie Road.

I support this proposal.
Access to locally sourced aggregates reduces transport distances, lowers project costs, and helps deliver essential infrastructure more efficiently. This quarry will play an important role in meeting future demand while supporting local jobs and investment. The Lochinvar Growth Corridor is not economically sustainable without it.
Having a quarry in close proximity to this expanding development will reduce extended haul delivery of material from less proximate quarries. It is also vital considering the depleting resources of the existing quarries in the Hunter Valley.

Objection Submission – Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project, Elderslie
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to lodge a formal objection to the proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project at Elderslie. After reviewing the project documentation and considering the impacts on local infrastructure, community safety, and the long term preservation of heritage assets, I strongly oppose approval of this development.
1. Heritage Risk: Elderslie Bridge (1892)
The Elderslie Bridge over the Hunter River, officially opened on 14 April 1892, is a heritage listed timber and wrought iron structure originally designed for horses, carts, and light rural traffic. It is not engineered to withstand the heavy industrial transport associated with the proposed quarry.
Structural Vulnerability
Timber truss bridges suffer cumulative fatigue. Subjecting a 130 year old structure to up to 720 heavy truck movements per day (360 each way) would accelerate:
• Micro fracturing of timber beams
• Loosening of iron brackets
• Long term structural instability
Escalating Maintenance Burden
Transport for NSW already conducts frequent maintenance closures to keep the bridge operational. Increased heavy vehicle loads would:
• Intensify wear
• Increase closure frequency
• Shift substantial maintenance costs onto taxpayers
Inevitable Structural Replacement
Historic timber bridges in the Hunter region have repeatedly required replacement when exposed to industrial freight demands. Approval of this quarry would place the Elderslie Bridge on the same trajectory, undermining heritage protection objectives.
2. Road Safety Risks on Elderslie Road
The ascent from Elderslie Bridge toward Branxton includes steep gradients reaching 10–12%, compressed into short, rolling sections.
Heavy Vehicle Performance
Loaded truck and dog combinations (42.5–50 tonnes) must downshift significantly on these inclines. This results in:
• Rapid speed loss
• Dangerous speed differentials with following vehicles
• Increased risk of rear end collisions and risky overtaking attempts
Narrow Rural Alignment
Elderslie Road has:
• No overtaking lanes
• Narrow sealed widths
• Soft gravel shoulders
Heavy vehicles frequently drop wheels off the sealed edge, causing:
• Edge break
• Pavement collapse
• Hazardous drop offs for everyday motorists
Increased Noise Pollution from Exhaust Brakes
The steep 10–12% downhill gradient requires heavy vehicles to use engine and exhaust brakes to maintain safe speed control. With up to 720 truck movements per day, this will result in:
• Frequent, high intensity exhaust brake noise
• Significant disruption to nearby residents
• Elevated noise levels during early morning, evening, and night-time periods
• A substantial decline in residential amenity along Elderslie Road and surrounding areas
This noise impact is unavoidable due to the physics of heavy vehicle braking on steep descents and cannot be mitigated through driver behaviour alone.
3. Intersection Safety: Maitland Road / New England Highway, Branxton
The intersection where Elderslie Road becomes Maitland Road and meets the New England Highway already records 1–2 significant crashes per year, including rear end collisions, T bone crashes, and fail to yield incidents.
Contributing Factors
• Rapid speed transitions from highway to township
• High turning movement complexity
• Driver distraction in a busy local environment
Recent Safety Measures
Authorities have recently installed solar powered “Slow Down” warning signs on both approaches along the New England Highway. This demonstrates that:
• The intersection is already recognised as high risk
• Additional mitigation was required even before quarry traffic was proposed
Introducing hundreds of quarry trucks daily turning across or entering highway traffic would significantly increase the likelihood of severe collisions and undermine the purpose of these new safety measures.
4. Road Surface Failure on Elderslie Road
Elderslie Road is primarily spray sealed, a surface suitable for light rural traffic but fundamentally inadequate for heavy industrial transport.
Shear Stress on Steep Grades
Heavy trucks accelerating uphill or braking downhill exert severe horizontal shear forces, causing:
• Delamination (aggregate tearing away)
• Flushing/bleeding (bitumen rising to the surface)
• Rapid pavement deformation
Edge Break and Shoulder Collapse
The narrow alignment forces heavy vehicles to drop tyres off the sealed edge, leading to:
• Rapid edge break
• Shoulder collapse
• Progressive narrowing of the drivable surface
Under 720 truck movements per day, the road surface would deteriorate rapidly, requiring full reconstruction at public expense.
5. Pedestrian Safety in a Growing Residential Area
The 60 km/h zone on Elderslie Road (George St to Maitland St) has:
• No footpaths
• Narrow lanes
• No street lighting
Residents including school children have reported near misses and unsafe walking conditions. With the expansion of Radford Park Estate and future residential growth, Elderslie is transitioning into a suburban community. High frequency heavy vehicle movements are incompatible with this environment and significantly increase the risk of pedestrian accidents, particularly at night or during school travel times.
6. Community Impact and Loss of Amenity
The proposed quarry would introduce:
• Noise
• Dust
• Vibration
• Heavy vehicle dominance
These impacts would erode the rural and residential character of Elderslie and Branxton, reduce liveability, and conflict with the community’s vision for safe, family-oriented growth.
Conclusion
The Bluestone Hardrock Quarry proposal presents unacceptable risks to:
• The heritage listed Elderslie Bridge
• Road safety on Elderslie Road and at the Branxton highway intersection
• Pedestrian safety in a growing suburban area
• Public infrastructure budgets
• Community wellbeing and amenity
For these reasons, I strongly urge the assessing authority to reject the proposal.

I am the Managing Director of a small concreting business with ten employees and due to our company's ongoing viability it is vital that projects such as this are approved due to our continuous need for the raw materials needed to make concrete which a quarry produces. Aggregates from a quarry are used in our civil works prior to us pouring concrete. Supply security is imperative to keep costs from spiralling and having access to a reliable quarry products is important for quality control and lower production costs to consumers.

Submission Objection to the Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project (SSD-76210271)
To: Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, NSW Government Application: Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project SSD-76210271
Site: Lot 5 Springvale Road, Elderslie and Blind Creek Road, Glendon Brook, Singleton LGA
Date: June 25th 2026

Position: I OBJECT to this application and request that it be refused.

I am a resident of Tangory Rise, approximately 3.5 kilometres from the proposed quarry. As a directly affected resident, I object to this application. Having reviewed the exhibited Environmental Impact Statement (EIS, May 2026) and its technical appendices, my objection is that the EIS does not discharge the proponent's onus to demonstrate the impacts are acceptable: it destroys a critically endangered, federally listed ecological community and relies on contestable biodiversity conclusions; it routes heavy haulage over a one-lane heritage bridge and through an intersection already operating at the worst level of service; and it defers critical road works and their funding to agreements not yet made. The proposal is contrary to the public interest under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

My interest in this application is direct. The air-quality assessment concludes the project would meet the particulate and silica criteria, yet none of its eleven modelled receptors is my home, and the meteorological model behind those predictions did not meet the wind-direction benchmarks that govern where dust travels. The permanent loss of 59 hectares of native vegetation, and the degradation of the Tangory landscape my street is named for, are borne by my locality, not by the proponent. For the reasons set out below, I respectfully request that the Department recommend, and the consent authority determine, that SSD-76210271 be refused.

Grounds for objection

1. The project destroys a critically endangered, federally listed ecological community. The Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (Appendix F) confirms the removal of 59.30 ha of native vegetation, including PCT 3315 (Central Hunter Ironbark - Spotted Gum Forest): about 39.7 ha is a threatened ecological community under the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, and 32.67 ha is the Central Hunter Valley Eucalypt Forest and Woodland, listed as critically endangered under the EPBC Act. The Commonwealth determined the project a controlled action precisely because it is likely to significantly affect this community and two further critically endangered matters, the Regent Honeyeater and Swift Parrot (MNES Assessment, Appendix G). That assessment concedes the community will be "completely removed" within the disturbance footprint, then argues this is not a significant impact because it equals less than 0.09% of the community's national extent and will be offset. A comparison to a national total does not erase the loss of a good-condition occurrence the BDAR maps as directly connected to Tangory Nature Reserve; the 974 ecosystem credits this clearing requires cannot recreate it; and final EPBC approval which NSW cannot grant remains required. The proponent's "insignificance" case sits in direct tension with the Commonwealth's own determination.

2. An Endangered species loses 41 hectares of foraging habitat adjoining its breeding refuge. The BDAR records the Large-eared Pied Bat, Endangered under both the BC Act and the EPBC Act at four locations on the site, and the project removes 41.31 ha of its foraging habitat (offset by 1,521 species credits). The BDAR finds no serious and irreversible impact only because no breeding habitat lies within the site, the nearest being just over 500m away in Tangory Nature Reserve yet, on the BDAR's own mapping, the cleared habitat is directly connected to that reserve. Offset credits purchased elsewhere do not protect this local population from losing foraging range immediately adjacent to its breeding refuge, and whether a test that turns on the absence of on-site breeding habitat adequately captures that loss warrants independent scrutiny.

3. The favourable air-quality finding rests on a model that fails its own wind-direction test, and does not assess my property. The Air Quality Impact Assessment (Appendix I) concludes the project would not exceed the criteria for PM2.5, PM10, TSP, dust deposition or respirable crystalline silica at the assessed receptors. Three limitations qualify that conclusion. First, the meteorological model driving the predictions did not meet the NSW wind-direction performance benchmarks (gross error 36° against a ≤30° benchmark; bias 16° against a ≤±10° benchmark) wind direction governs where dust travels, and the site lies in complex valley terrain.

Second, the assessment models eleven nominated receptors (R01–R10, and the Pet Motel C01, the business Singleton Council expressly asked be assessed), none of which is my dwelling at Tangory Rise. Third, the silica result is not based on testing the rock's silica content but is derived by assuming the modelled PM2.5 increment is wholly crystalline silica so it is only as reliable as the dust modelling beneath it. These matters warrant independent NSW EPA scrutiny before the "no exceedance" conclusion is relied upon.

4. Groundwater and water-resource risks are managed, not eliminated. The Water Resources and Hydrogeological assessments (Appendices J and M) predict pit dewatering rising to 22 kL/day by year 30 and describe drawdown as "largely confined" to the pit. Given the site's position near the Mooki–Hunter Thrust and its connection to the Glendon Brook and Hunter River systems, State water resources under the Water Management Act 2000, the precautionary principle weighs against accepting "largely confined" predictions where the bores and rainwater supplies of surrounding properties and agriculture are at stake. Sediment controls and ongoing monitoring manage but do not eliminate this risk.

5. The haul route runs over a one-lane heritage bridge and through an already-failing intersection, and key findings depend on unenforced restrictions. Up to 220 truck movements a day of 50-tonne vehicles would use the single-lane Elderslie Bridge over the Hunter River, a local heritage item (LEP I14), and the New England Highway / Wine Country Drive intersection, where the right-turn already operates at Level of Service F, the worst rating. The Transport Assessment (Appendix L) asserts the quarry's added heavy-vehicle traffic has "no impact" on this failing movement, a conclusion warranting independent scrutiny. No structural assessment of that heritage bridge has been undertaken for sustained 50-tonne haulage; the proponent's consolidated mitigation schedule (Appendix D) records only that TfNSW "has not requested" one. Its favourable findings for the bridge and for school buses also rest on operational restrictions, namely that haulage will avoid the afternoon peak and school-bus times, whose enforcement as binding, monitored conditions is essential but not yet secured.

6. Critical road works and costs are deferred to agreements not yet made. The Transport Assessment (Appendix L) concedes that about 300 m of Springvale Road must be widened for heavy vehicles under a Voluntary Planning Agreement, and that Section 7.11 contributions are only "understood" to provide sufficient funds to maintain and upgrade the haul route "if and when these works are required." None of this is secured or quantified, and maintenance is framed as reactive rather than guaranteed, leaving Singleton Council and its ratepayers exposed to any shortfall.

7. The gas-pipeline conflict is unresolved on the proponent's own evidence. The EIS asserts that Appendix V demonstrates the quarry can co-exist with the Queensland-Hunter Gas Pipeline. It does not. Appendix V, authored by the proponent, sets out its own "Unresolved Issues": the alignment conflict is undetermined, "no mitigation measures have been agreed," the Route Change Request put to Santos in July 2025 has drawn no formal response, and critically blasting exclusion zones and "vibration impacts on pipeline integrity" remain unresolved. No easement is registered. A blasting operation whose compatibility with a high-pressure gas corridor is, on the proponent's own admission, unresolved should not be approved on an assurance that these matters are merely "resolvable" later.

8. Need is asserted; the least-impact option is not demonstrated. The justification (Section 2.5 and Chapter 7) rests on regional housing and infrastructure demand, but does not demonstrate that existing or approved quarries cannot meet that demand, or that this site, adjoining a conservation reserve and clearing a federally listed community, is the least-impact location.

9. The 30-year application understates the true horizon. The EIS records a potential resource life of up to 50 years. The impacts assessed over 30 years foreshadow a longer operation and a likely future extension, whose cumulative effects are not before the consent authority now.

The claimed benefits do not alter this conclusion. The Economic Impact Assessment (Appendix R) supports up to 15 full-time jobs, a small benefit against externalised, long-tail costs the State and Council carry: the biodiversity offset liability, and the maintenance of the haul route and its one-lane bridge. The "secured local supply" rationale is undercut by the proponent's own assessment, whose greenhouse-gas calculation (Appendix I, Section 9.1) assumes an average 200 km return haul per load, markets far beyond the 30-minute local catchment the proposal emphasises. Charitable contributions, whatever their merit, are not a relevant planning consideration and cannot offset these impacts.

For the reasons above, I respectfully request that SSD-76210271 be refused.

Resident
Tangory Rise

I wish to formally object to the proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project near Elderslie and Branxton.

As a resident of Elderslie Road, I have serious concerns regarding the significant impacts this development will have on the safety, health, wellbeing and quality of life of existing residents.

1.Road Safety Concerns:
My greatest concern is the increase in heavy vehicle traffic on roads that are fundamentally unsuitable for large-scale quarry operations.

Elderslie Road and surrounding roads are narrow rural roads that are already challenging for two vehicles to pass safely in many locations. Introducing quarry trucks throughout the day will significantly increase the risk of accidents.

There are no continuous footpaths along the road despite the presence of residential homes and school bus stops. Children regularly walk to and from bus stops and residents frequently walk along the roadside due to the absence of pedestrian infrastructure.

The prospect of large quarry trucks travelling these roads all day creates an unacceptable safety risk for:

* School children.
* Pedestrians.
* Cyclists.
* Elderly residents.
* Families with young children.
*accessing out small town (small businesses)

I do not believe the current road network was designed to accommodate industrial-scale quarry traffic.

2.Impacts on Residential Amenity:

Residents chose to purchase and build homes in this area because of its quiet rural lifestyle and peaceful environment.

The proposed quarry represents a significant industrial development in close proximity to residential properties and will fundamentally alter the character of the area.

The constant movement of heavy vehicles, operation of machinery, crushing activities and associated industrial operations, blasts etc will permanently change the lifestyle currently enjoyed by residents.

3. Noise Impacts

The quarry will generate ongoing noise from:

* Excavators and earthmoving equipment.
* Crushing and screening operations.
* Heavy vehicle movements.
* Reversing alarms.
* Loading and stockpiling activities.
* Blasting.

Even if noise levels technically comply with regulatory standards, the continual industrial noise will significantly reduce residents' enjoyment of their homes and outdoor spaces.

4.Blasting, Vibration and Mental Health Impacts

I am particularly concerned about blasting activities.

As a person who experiences PTSD and anxiety associated with loud unexpected noises, quarry blasting would have a significant negative impact on my wellbeing and quality of life.

The effects of blasting extend beyond technical compliance limits. Residents must live with the anticipation, stress and disruption associated with repeated explosions and vibration events.

There are also concerns regarding:

* Structural damage to homes.
* Cracking of walls and foundations.
* Damage to sheds and water tanks.
* Ongoing vibration impacts.

5.Dust and Air Quality

Dust generated by quarrying activities, crushing operations, stockpiles and truck movements has the potential to affect the health of surrounding residents.

I am concerned about:

* Reduced air quality.
* Respiratory issues.
* Asthma and allergy aggravation.
* Dust deposition on homes and vehicles.
* Reduced enjoyment of outdoor areas.

Dust impacts are particularly concerning given the long-term nature of the project.

6. Rainwater Tank Contamination

Like many residents in the area, we rely heavily on rainwater tanks.

Dust generated from quarry activities has the potential to settle on roofs and enter water collection systems.

This raises concerns about:

* Drinking water quality.
* Long-term contamination.
* Increased filtration and maintenance costs.
* Health impacts associated with contaminated water supplies.

The proposal does not provide confidence that tank water users can be adequately protected over the life of the quarry.

7.Environmental Impacts

The proposal has the potential to impact local waterways, drainage systems and ecosystems through:

* Sediment runoff.
* Water quality degradation.
* Habitat disturbance.
* Increased erosion.
* Changes to natural drainage patterns.

The long-term environmental consequences of these impacts should not be underestimated.

8.Road Damage and Cost to the Community

Heavy quarry vehicles will inevitably accelerate the deterioration of local roads.

Residents already experience potholes, road edge failures and maintenance issues.

The increased burden on local infrastructure is likely to result in:

* More frequent road damage.
* Increased maintenance costs.
* Reduced safety for motorists.
* Additional costs ultimately borne by taxpayers.

9.Property Values

Many residents have invested significant financial resources into purchasing land and building homes in this area.

The introduction of a large industrial quarry nearby is likely to negatively affect property values and reduce the attractiveness of the area for future buyers.

Residents should not be expected to bear the financial consequences of a development that substantially reduces local amenity. There is no benefit of the quarry for us.

11. Loss of Rural Character

Elderslie and Branxton are valued for their rural outlook, open space and peaceful environment.

The proposed quarry is inconsistent with these values and will replace a rural landscape with an industrial extraction operation that may operate for decades.

12. Cumulative Impacts

While each of the above concerns is significant on its own, the combined impacts of:

* Heavy truck traffic.
* Road safety risks.
* Noise.
* Dust.
* Blasting.
* Vibration.
* Environmental impacts.
* Reduced property values.

will create a substantial and ongoing burden on nearby residents.

In Conclusion:

The proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project will have unacceptable impacts on local residents, public safety, community wellbeing, environmental values and residential amenity.

I request that the application be refused with strong consideration of the above points.

Should the proposal proceed further, I request that a comprehensive independent assessment be undertaken regarding traffic safety, pedestrian safety, CHILD SAFETY, blasting impacts, dust management, water quality impacts, road upgrades and long-term effects on surrounding residents.

I am writing to express my support for the proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project at Elderslie and Glendon Brook in the Singleton Shire.

The Hunter region is going through a period of significant growth. There are major housing developments, road and rail upgrades, industrial construction projects, and renewable energy infrastructure all either underway or in the pipeline. All of these projects need a reliable, local supply of construction aggregate and right now, that supply is under pressure.

The Bluestone Hardrock Quarry would help address that shortage. The site contains a high-quality hardrock resource capable of producing concrete aggregate, road base, rail ballast, and other construction materials that are in strong demand across the Upper and Lower Hunter, the Central Coast, and Greater Sydney. Having a quarry of this scale located close to end-use markets makes a real difference to cost and supply reliability.

Rail industry needs are a particular concern for me. Rail ballast the crushed stone used to stabilise railway tracks — is a specialist product that requires a high-quality hardrock source. With the NSW Government committed to expanding freight and passenger rail networks across the region, and with multi-billion dollar rail projects included in the State's $118 billion infrastructure pipeline, securing a local source of ballast material is important. The Bluestone quarry is well placed to meet that need.

Industrial construction also depends on this kind of supply. Whether it is a new industrial estate, a logistics facility, a concrete batching plant, or a renewable energy project, every major construction job in the region needs aggregate. The Hunter-Central Coast Renewable Energy Zone alone is driving significant demand for construction materials as solar farms, battery storage facilities, and associated infrastructure are built out across the region. A locally sourced supply reduces costs and transport emissions compared to bringing material in from further away.

I am also satisfied that the proponent has taken community concerns seriously. Haulage has been restricted to weekdays only, blasting is limited to business hours Monday to Friday, and the project includes commitments to road upgrades and progressive site rehabilitation. The environmental assessments indicate that noise, dust, and water impacts can be managed within acceptable limits.

On balance, I believe this project is in the public interest. The Hunter region needs construction materials to build the homes, roads, rail lines, and industrial facilities that our growing population requires. The Bluestone Hardrock Quarry is a well-located, well-designed project that can help meet that need over the long term.

I urge the Department to support this application.

We are writing this submission in support of the Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project.
We are an Earthmoving & Haulage company who utilise products on a weekly basis from local quarries in the area.
Being a previous quarry operator we saw the benefits to the community that comes with having a good cost effective product.
With the previous closures of local quarries and the lifespan of the current ones coming to an end it would not be cost effective or viable to travel longer distances to source product for local projects.

As a resident of Branxton, I wish to formally express my significant concerns regarding the proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project. After reviewing the Environmental Impact Statement and supporting documentation, I believe several critical issues have either not been adequately assessed or have been omitted entirely.
The following matters require further investigation before any approval is considered:
Road Safety and Traffic Impacts
• Elderslie Road contains several narrow sections where the road width is insufficient to safely accommodate heavy vehicles travelling in both directions while also providing safe access for pedestrians and cyclists. This is particularly evident at the Black Creek bottleneck between George Street and Lindsay Street.
• The proposal does not adequately assess the significant safety risks associated with pedestrians, school children, cyclists and recreational users of Elderslie Road. There is currently no dedicated shared pathway or continuous footpath network, particularly around key intersections, to safely separate vulnerable road users from increased heavy vehicle traffic.
• The intersection of Radford Parkway and Elderslie Road presents a significant safety concern. Vehicles exiting Radford Parkway are required to enter an 80 km/h section of Elderslie Road immediately over the crest of a hill, where approaching traffic has limited visibility. The proposal has not considered how an additional 220 heavy vehicle movements per day will increase the risk of serious collisions at this location. Consideration should also be given to constructing a pedestrian footpath and shared bicycle crossing at this intersection to improve safety for local residents.
• The intersection of Maitland Street and Elderslie Road is already unsuitable for increased heavy vehicle traffic. Visibility is significantly impaired due to the left-turn slip lane from Maitland Road, obstructing motorists attempting to turn right from Elderslie Road. The absence of clearly defined lane edges contributes to driver confusion and creates an existing safety issue that would be substantially worsened by increased quarry traffic.
• The traffic assessment appears to consider only quarry haulage vehicles. It fails to account for contractor vehicles, fuel deliveries, maintenance contractors, service providers and employee traffic travelling outside the nominated quarry operating hours. These vehicle movements will increase total traffic volumes beyond those assessed.
• Existing traffic movements associated with local farming operations, council waste collection vehicles, school buses, livestock transport, oversized agricultural machinery and other local businesses have not been adequately assessed.
Flooding and Emergency Access
• Elderslie Road is subject to flooding, particularly near Black Creek. Despite this known constraint, the proposal contains no assessment of flood impacts on the haul route and provides no contingency or alternative transport route during flood events.
• The Elderslie Bridge has no clearly displayed load rating, and the proposal provides no assessment of the bridge's long-term structural capacity under substantially increased heavy vehicle movements.
• Bridge maintenance closures and emergency shutdowns have not been considered, despite the significant operational impact these events would have on quarry transport.
• There are no designated emergency stopping bays or brake failure escape areas on the eastern approach to Elderslie Bridge. Should a heavy vehicle suffer brake failure while descending towards the bridge, there is no safe location to stop before reaching the structure.
Blasting and Noise
• No existing background noise (decibel) monitoring data has been included within the application to establish current environmental conditions.
• No Air Overpressure Assessment has been provided for blasting operations. Without this information, the impacts of blasting on nearby residents, structures and livestock cannot be properly assessed.
Dust and Air Quality
• The application does not adequately address the health impacts associated with silica dust generated by quarry operations and heavy vehicle movements along the haul route.
• Insufficient information has been provided regarding dust suppression measures, monitoring programs and mitigation strategies to protect nearby residents, livestock, agricultural properties and local businesses from long-term exposure.
Water Management
• No comprehensive Water Management Plan has been provided outlining how sediment-laden water will be captured, treated and prevented from leaving the site.
• The application does not identify any water extraction licence, groundwater licence or river water allocation to support mineral processing activities.
• There is also no assessment of stormwater management during major rainfall events or how contaminated runoff will be prevented from entering surrounding waterways.
Wastewater and Fuel Storage
• No sewage or wastewater management plan has been included detailing how wastewater generated on-site will be treated and disposed of.
• The proposal provides insufficient information regarding on-site fuel storage, fuel tanker delivery frequency, delivery routes or quantities of fuel to be stored.
Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
• Areas that have already undergone vegetation clearing appear to have been disturbed prior to any publicly documented Aboriginal cultural heritage salvage program. Clarification should be provided regarding whether appropriate cultural heritage investigations and salvage works were completed before clearing commenced.
Road Incident History
• The traffic assessment appears incomplete as it does not reference the fatal bus crash at the North Rothbury Highway roundabout located on the proposed haul route.
• It also omits the rollover incident involving a Coles delivery truck at the same roundabout. These incidents are directly relevant when assessing the safety of substantially increasing heavy vehicle traffic through this corridor.
Community and Business Impacts
• The assessment fails to adequately consider impacts on existing businesses operating along the haul route, including the local pet motel, turf farm, Pierre's Winery and numerous agricultural enterprises that rely on safe road access.
• Noise and vibration assessments provide insufficient evidence regarding the cumulative impacts of increased heavy vehicle movements on nearby residents and businesses.
• Previous investigations undertaken by Glencore into a comparable haul route for a proposed coal project reportedly identified that additional mitigation measures, including double glazing for affected residences and independent road maintenance funded by the proponent, would be required due to the existing road network being unsuitable for high-frequency heavy vehicle movements. The current proposal provides no equivalent level of assessment or mitigation.
Utilities and Infrastructure
• The proposal does not identify how electrical power will be supplied to the quarry site or whether upgrades to existing infrastructure will be required.
• The proposed quarry also appears to conflict with a future gas pipeline alignment. The application provides no assessment of how these two major infrastructure projects will safely coexist or whether appropriate consultation has occurred.
Given the number of omissions and deficiencies identified above, I do not believe the Environmental Impact Statement provides sufficient information to accurately assess the impacts of the proposed quarry on public safety, environmental protection, local infrastructure or community wellbeing.
I respectfully request that these matters be comprehensively addressed through further independent investigation before any determination is made on this proposal. The potential impacts on residents, businesses, road users and the surrounding environment warrant a far more detailed assessment than has currently been provided.

I write in my personal capacity in support of the proposed Bluestone Hard Rock Quarry at Elderslie.
As a resident of the Hunter region, I have observed the significant growth occurring across our communities in recent years, including new housing developments, industrial projects, infrastructure upgrades and associated investment throughout the region.

While I am providing this submission as a private individual, my professional career has involved working closely with a broad range of businesses operating within the construction, development, transport, manufacturing and property sectors. Through these interactions, I have developed an appreciation of the importance of maintaining a reliable and sustainable supply of construction materials to support economic growth, business investment and regional development.

The continued expansion of the Hunter region requires significant investment in housing, roads, schools, hospitals, industrial facilities and public infrastructure. All of these projects rely upon access to quality quarry materials. In my view, increasing local supply capacity will help strengthen supply chain resilience, improve the availability of essential materials and support the timely delivery of projects that benefit both current and future residents of the region.

I also recognise that major developments must be appropriately assessed and managed through the planning process.

I acknowledge that responsible environmental management is a critical consideration for any quarry development. Having reviewed the information made available through the development application and supporting assessments, I am encouraged by the measures proposed to manage key issues such as noise, dust, water resources, biodiversity, traffic movements and the progressive rehabilitation of affected areas.

Modern quarry operations are subject to rigorous environmental standards, ongoing monitoring requirements and regulatory oversight. These frameworks are designed to ensure that potential impacts are carefully managed and that operations remain accountable to both the community and relevant authorities. In my view, this provides confidence that the project can be developed and operated responsibly while balancing environmental stewardship with the region's growing infrastructure needs.

Subject to compliance with all relevant approval conditions and environmental management requirements, I believe the proposed development represents a positive outcome for the Hunter region and should be approved.

The proposal will provide an important source of construction materials, support regional economic growth, create employment opportunities, strengthen supply chain resilience and contribute to the delivery of essential housing, commercial developments and infrastructure projects. In turn, these projects support local businesses, sustain employment and help facilitate the continued growth and prosperity of the Hunter region.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this submission. I appreciate the opportunity to participate in the assessment process and to express my support for a project that I believe will make a valuable contribution to the future development of the region.

To Whom It May Concern,

I write in support of the proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project on behalf of Steeline Hunter.

Steeline Hunter is a locally owned and operated manufacturer and supplier of structural steel framing, roofing, walling and associated building products to the residential, commercial and industrial construction sectors throughout the Hunter Region and surrounding areas. For over 20 years, we have supplied products to builders, developers, contractors and homeowners who rely on a strong and dependable local construction supply chain.

Our business experiences firsthand the increasing demand for new housing, industrial developments, warehouses, agricultural buildings and public infrastructure across the Hunter. Every one of these projects depends on the availability of essential construction materials, including hard rock aggregates used in roads, foundations, concrete production and civil infrastructure.

A secure local supply of these materials is fundamental to maintaining project schedules, controlling construction costs and supporting continued investment in our region. When critical materials must be sourced from greater distances, the result is often increased transport costs, supply delays and greater pressure on already stretched construction timelines. These impacts are ultimately borne by builders, businesses and consumers.

The proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry represents an important investment in the long-term resilience of the Hunter's construction industry. By providing a locally sourced supply of hard rock, the project has the potential to strengthen the regional supply chain, support major infrastructure projects and assist in meeting the growing demand for residential and industrial development.

Beyond the direct benefits of aggregate supply, projects of this scale generate meaningful economic activity across a wide range of industries. They create employment opportunities, support local contractors, transport operators, equipment suppliers and service providers, and contribute to the ongoing strength of businesses that service the construction sector, including manufacturers such as Steeline Hunter.

As a local employer and manufacturer, we recognise that developments of this nature must be undertaken responsibly. It is important that environmental impacts, traffic, noise, dust and biodiversity are effectively managed through appropriate planning conditions, ongoing monitoring and regulatory oversight. We are confident that the planning and environmental assessment process provides the necessary framework to ensure these matters are appropriately addressed throughout the life of the project.

The Hunter Region continues to experience significant growth and remains a key economic region or New South Wales. To support this growth, investment in enabling infrastructure and essential construction resources is critical. Projects such as the Bluestone Hardrock Quarry help ensure that local industries have access to the materials required to deliver homes, businesses, manufacturing facilities and public infrastructure efficiently and competitively.

On behalf of Steeline Hunter, I respectfully express our support for the Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project and encourage its approval, subject to the environmental management measures and operational conditions determined through the planning assessment process.

Thank you for considering our submission.

Yours faithfully,

Grahame Prosser
Managing Director
Steeline Hunter

There is a demand for quarry material not only in our region but on the outskirts of Newcastle to.
Our existing quarries will not meet demand for the added infrastructure and developments, as our region has and continues to grow.
It will also create additional employment opportunities not only within the quarry itself but for haulage contractors.
As a third generation local business owner and resident, I believe this project will ensure growth, development and be a valuable asset.
The location, land and plans look like a really good step in the right direction for the Hunter.

I am a nearby resident who uses the proposed haul route every week. My primary concern is the danger and congestion that the trucks will present on the haul route. I am also very concerned about the impact on local health and the environment, especially the risk of damage or loss to the artesian water in our bore. We live in the same mountain range as the proposed quarry, but at a higher altitude. I spent about $50,000 installing a bore to protect our property from drought. The bore goes down into the same type of bluestone rock that the quarry will extract using explosives. I am concerned that the explosions might cause drainage, or pollution from natural gas, of the artesian water under our property.

Our house is made of concrete blocks and I am concerned about the damage that it will sustain due to vibration from frequent blasting in the quarry. Blasting produces noise pollution and silica dust, which may cause silicosis and a burden to the health system.

The heavy B-double trucks will pose a danger, with likely one truck per minute on the haul route. My experience of similar trucks on the Elderslie bridge over the Hunter RIver gives me cause to worry because it is not uncommon for big trucks to push their way onto the Elderslie Bridge and out of intersections. Laden trucks crawl slowly up the hill to Branxton and they will be queued at the Elderslie bridge, so there will be convoys of trucks on the road. I worry that motorists will become impatient and overtake in dangerous places as, in the past, I have witnessed cars overtaking on blind crests and over unbroken lines. We will have gridlock at the bridge and at the highway junctions, with long delays and more risk-taking driver behaviour. What is more, there will be nothing to stop the contracted truck drivers, who have schedules to keep, from exceeding speed limits and breaking road rules. Who will police the truck driver's obedience to company instructions and rules?

The haul route is a rural road, not a highway. It was never designed nor constructed to carry the volume of trucks as proposed. It has corners, hills and bridges. It is constantly coming up with new potholes. The cost of road repairs will be enormous. The Elderslie Bridge is heritage listed and was never built to sustain the proposed volume of trucks. It too will require huge amounts of maintenance, at high cost.

I am concerned that there is danger to school children along bus routes and to kids on bikes. There will be added danger at concealed entrances. It's a rural road with nowhere for pedestrians.

I am also concerned about the impact on local businesses and local land values. Surrounding cities and towns are already adequately serviced by gravel pits with immediate access to highways and main roads. The pet hotel next door to the quarry will go out of business, adding to local unemployment.

And then there is the environmental impact. Tangory Nature Reserve will be endangered. There will be pollution of the air and tank water from dust. Vibrations along fault lines could cause fracking of natural gas (known to be in the vicinity) and thereby pollute artesian water and local waterways. There is already too much water being drawn from the Hunter River. There are numerous sites of Aboriginal significance in the surrounding mountain range.

If this development is approved then I believe the following requirements, amongst others, should be attached:
Bluestone Hardrock Quarry must widen the roads to two lanes, both ways, from Springvale Road to the Hunter Expressway.
Bluestone Hardrock Quarry must construct bus sidings and footpaths for school children and pedestrians along the haul route.
Bluestone Hardrock Quarry must fully address dust suppression.
Bluestone Hardrock Quarry must fully address noise suppression.
Bluestone Hardrock Quarry must not take water from the Hunter River, nor from atesian basins. They must use dam water only.
Bluestone Hardrock Quarry must financially compensate anyone who is adversely affected healthwise or financially by this development.
Bluestone Hardrock Quarry must pay for all ongoing road and bridge maintenance expenses. NOT the taxpayer!

To whom it may concern,

I wish to lodge a formal objection to the proposed Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project.

I am a resident of Glendon Brook and recently moved to the area to enjoy its rural environment, peaceful lifestyle and agricultural character. I am concerned that this development would permanently change the nature of the surrounding area for at least the next 30 years.

My objections are as follows.

1. Heavy Vehicle Traffic and Road Safety

The proposal involves transporting up to one million tonnes of material annually via Springvale Road, Stanhope Road, Elderslie Road and surrounding road networks.

These roads are already used by local residents, school buses, agricultural vehicles and recreational traffic. A substantial increase in heavy truck movements will:

reduce road safety
increase the risk of serious accidents
accelerate road deterioration
negatively affect local residents who rely on these roads every day.

I am not convinced the existing road network is suitable for the proposed volume of quarry traffic over the life of the project.

2. Noise, Blasting and Dust

The proposal includes regular drilling, blasting, crushing and screening activities.

Even if these activities comply with regulatory limits, they will inevitably affect the amenity of nearby rural residents.

I am concerned about:

ongoing blasting noise and vibration
airborne dust affecting nearby homes and livestock
cumulative impacts over a 30-year operational life
reduced enjoyment of our property.

The rural lifestyle that attracted many families to this area should not be sacrificed for an industrial operation.

3. Environmental Impacts

The project requires vegetation clearing and will impact native habitat.

I am concerned about:

loss of native vegetation
impacts on local wildlife
impacts on waterways and water quality
long-term landscape alteration.

Once these impacts occur they cannot easily be reversed.

4. Property Values

Large industrial developments of this nature have the potential to reduce the desirability of nearby rural properties.

Residents who have invested significant amounts into homes and acreage properties should not bear financial losses resulting from an industrial quarry operating nearby for decades.

5. Cumulative Community Impacts

While each individual impact may appear manageable in isolation, the combined effects of:

increased truck traffic
blasting
dust
industrial noise
environmental disturbance
visual impacts

represent a significant long-term change to the character of Glendon Brook and the surrounding district.

The proposal would industrialise what is currently a quiet rural landscape.

Conclusion

I respectfully request that the Department carefully consider the long-term impacts this proposal will have on nearby residents, local roads, the environment and the rural character of the area.

In my opinion, the environmental and community costs outweigh the benefits of the project.

For these reasons I object to the Bluestone Hardrock Quarry Project and request that development consent not be granted.

Thank you for considering my submission.