Cabbage Tree Road Sand Quarry

Dear Sir or Madame,

I wish to submit my objections to DA - SSD 6125 on the following grounds.

This proposed development will firstly remove all vegetation from this area which includes preferred koala feed trees such as swamp mahogany (Eucalyptus robusta) Parramatta Red Gum (Eucalyptus parramatensis) Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) and Scribbly Gum (Eucalyptus signata). This moist environment has created habitat for all the fauna and flora listed in this area. Given it is an environmentally sensitive area it must be protected and left in its natural state to allow threatened species to survive.

Port Stephens landscape is already being adversely de-forested by five operating sand mines with the potential of two more mines being approved. The cumulative environmental damage that has been done to Port Stephens has already substantially reduced the koala population. If this mine goes ahead it will reduce this population even further to critically low levels.

The proposed sand mine will have 140 trucks entering and exiting from a 90k road which will be hazardous on the already busy Roads. Trucks can be slower than regular vehicles consequently the likelihood of collisions will increase as the number of trucks using this road increases.

Aboriginal stakeholders disclosed in the Aboriginal Survey 2.4, 'that the area and site within it were part of walking tracks used to move around surrounding locations and for temporary camp sites.' A resident who lives near this proposed mine has a large tree with an Aboriginal Canoe carving out of it which confirms Aboriginals used this area. Although a survey of the surface of this land did not identify any artefacts it was suggested by the archeologist who did the study that vegetation would cover artefacts hence making it difficult to see them. Therefore the archeologist suggested, 'the existence of in situ cultural materials can not be ruled out.' Given the relationship the Indigenous people had with this land it should be protected from any activities which would cause damage and relocation of any artefacts on this site.

It is of great concern that this proposal which will profit a few could put peoples' health at risk by mining on land which is the groundwater catchment area for the Hunter. Furthermore the mine is also located within the "Red Zone" where groundwater is contaminated by perflurochemicals (PFOS and PFOA) from the Williamtown RAAF base. It is yet to be determined whether sand mining in this toxic zone will spread these contaminates. In addition the local residents are at risk of serious respiratory illnesses such as silicosis from wind-born dust from the mine.

Despite the adverse impact this mine will have on it surrounds the Environmental Impact Statement fails to include an offset package. Current regulations requires such provisions in these circumstances therefore this DA is invalid.

The community of Williamtown and beyond will bear the health cost of this mine and its subsequent social and economic loses too. It makes better sense to create environmentally sustainable businesses which benefit the community and the environment.

Please consider the environment and the health of people in the Hunter and reject this development application.

Thank you for considering my views.

Yours sincerely,


Resident of Port Stephens.

I wish to oppose this application for the proposed sand mine on Cabbage Tree Road.
I and my family moved to Williamtown 6 years ago for a life style change this sand mine was not on the radar and it will change our lives but not for the reasons we moved here.
From the start this development has been clouded and smelly to say the least.Dodgy dealings by a stacked Council no tender process money turning up in brown paper bags and very questionable persons involved in it all this was said at the meeting at Tomago Bowling Club on the 1st Ferurary.
We have sand mines already operating in the area this sand mine is in the middle of a Residental area we live in a Suburb just like everyone else we just have bigger back yards that's our choice if this was in Charlestown or Merewether no one would dream of digging up a vacant block for sand or anything else.
The mine is within very close proximity to homes ,with family's, just like you people that are assessing this.
To destroy this area of land and flatten it is beyond comprehension the trees on this land act as pumps to remove water from the ground to remove these old established trees will cause the ground water to rise we are already experiencing record ground water levels from super storms that are becoming more and more frequent due to the global warming factor.How will the applicant recover this land you just can't put old growth trees back in the ground these trees have been here for hundreds of years.
There are Koalas and other native species in this area what will happen to them will they just be killed off in the persuit of money and greed.
This was an Aboriginal area have any surveys been carried out to check for any artefacts or any history from the tribes that lived and walked on this land for millions of years or is it just done from a deck top program and pushed under the rug.
This road is very dangerous with the number of truck movements on it already how will it cope with more heavy truck movements we the residents risk our lives every day getting in and out of our driveways not if but when a fatality occurs will you people making these decisions be accountable to the families.
We are already fighting to stop another sand mine from increasing truck movements if this proposal goes ahead Cabbage Tree Road will be like the M1 it is only a single lane road each way.
The noise from these trucks is non stop now we are entitled to live in peace and harmony from early morning the trucks are rumbling past no chance of a sleep in on a day off with noise and air brakes being applied.
Removing these sand hills will also remove a natural noise buffer from the RAAF base and Airport so more noise affecting the families living in this area. How will the applicant suppress sand from blowing on to affected properties, they can't, so what about the health of the residences on Cabbage Tree Road from dust and siliceous.
I sat in shock at the meeting at Tomago when one of the Planning people said,well if there is to much dust or sand effecting the surrounding properties the applicant will buy them out what part of this don't you get we don't want the mine for that very reason and we don't want to move.
And last but not least the RED ZONE this development sits right in the middle of the RED ZONE how in gods name is any Planning Department going to approve the removal of contaminated sand to be used in construction or what ever knowing this product is contaminated and cancer causing once again are you going to be responsible for the health of workers along the supply chain from Williamtown to Sydney and beyond.
It was said at the meeting they won't dig that far down firstly how can they be trusted and secondly what about trucks driving over the contaminated sand to get in and out of the property and then spreading the contamination by the truck tyres. This contamination is spread far and wide with the department of defence and the Government running for cover.
This proposal needs to be stopped on these facts alone we are dealing with a very dangerous suitation and don't know what the out come is, no Government Department should be dealing with this until all the facts are known.
The residence from Williamtown,Fullerton Cove and Salt Ash are fighting for our rights if it's not CSG,its sand mines and ever increasing truck movements and now contamination from the RAAF we are under constant attack and pressure in our daily lives dealing with this, its having an ever increasing effect on out
mental and physical health and it's unfair and unaustralian.
The opposition against this proposal is huge it's time to listen to the the tax payers and people that live in the area ,as was seen by the number of people at the Tomago meeting and the number of submissions you are receiving .
This is nothing but a money grab fuelled by greed with no regard for the residence on Cabbage Tree Road or the environment like the coal mines in the Hunter Vally rape the land and then walk away.
As the song goes " Pave paradise put up a peaking lot " this must not be allowed.
Your people have a moral duty to the health and welfare of the people that live in this area.
David Vial

I am the co-owner of a property on Cabbage Tree Road. I am extremely concerned about the proposal for a sand mine next to my home which will be in operation for 15 years. The excessive noise, the risk of sand dust silicosis and the hundreds of heavy truck movements from early in the morning on an already busy and congested road, will have a detrimental impact on my quality of life and the lives of my family and grandchildren. Also theacceleration lane proposed will be at the front of my property which will cause huge safety concerns for getting in and out of my property safely. I am concerned about my health, as I had a stroke and major heart problem and suffer with stress issues. I am worried about all the extra stress and how this will affect the health of myself and my family. I am also in the Red Zone for the toxic water and ground contamination from the RAAF base which is affecting the water aquifers as the water table is so high in this area. I care greatly for the environment of the fauna, especially the koalas that live in the proposed sand mine site. They are endangered and their habitat and environment needs to be kept safe and secure for future generations. The sand mine as well as been in the Red Zone, is and will greatly impact and significantly devalue my property and greatly affect the health, quality of life and well being of my family and many other residents.

In 2014, Port Stephens Council controversially awarded a contract for quarrying of 4.6 million tonnes of sand over 15 years at 398 Cabbage Tree Road, Williamtown. It would remove critical Koala habitat and other at risk species, will destroy the quality of life of our family and local residents, and would add hundreds of heavy truck movements to an already overloaded and unsuitable carriageway within a 90km/h zone. The risk of sand dust silicosis is real and threatens the health of our community and their children. The removal of 54 hectares of vegetation would see a major disruption to the sensitive charge and discharge rates of the tomago sandbed aquifer - the trees effectively act as `pumps' to the aquifer, regulating the entire ecosystem. The removal of that vegetation and flattening of the land would remove a critical mitigating buffer zone to the RAAF base and its activities directly to the North and North East of the proposed site. All of this for a quarry supplying a product which is not in short supply, is readily available at the 5 other sand mines already located within 10km of the proposed site, employing a measly 3 to 5 people with any royalties going back to the council for their use and disposal and not necessarily to the rate payers.

Finally, the proposed site now sits directly in the middle of a declared `red zone' contamination area. An area governed by strict precautionary and cautionary principles dictated by NSW EPA and NSW Chief Scientist, Professor, Maryanne O'Kane. The proponents have failed to take any of this into account in their submission.

The means must justify the end and the unknown and known significant risks to this significant environment can only be avoided by refusing this proposal. We reserve all our rights and entitlements against the NSW Department of Planning and any decision makers in relation to any future loss or damages (including future health claims) as a result of the proposed sand mine should the proposal be approved.













Environmental Impacts -

Koalas

The Port Stephens area is an important population for the Koala, at a state and federal level. This is recognised by the federal Department of the Environment and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. The proposal will wipe out preferred Koala Habitat, a total of 10 koalas were found on site as noted in the EIS, this area is imperative to the survival and interbreeding of the population.

There is no formal offset or offset calculations using the NSW Bio banking calculator have been included. 

Water

There are unknown effects to the Tomago sand beds. The native vegetation acts as the main stabiliser of the water table, removing the vegetation and flattening the dunes will cause a natural increase in the water table. A characteristic that in the current situation and the Red Zone is not acceptable. Once the natural undulation is flattened, this will cause further drainage problems affecting nearby properties, if and when we have the next rain deluge.

Historically the previous mining on the site for Routille and Zircon the RZM mine, was shut down in the early 90's, this is due to the operation bringing up arsenic and heavy metals to the water table, Hunter water and residents bore supply.


Other Environmental

* Water dependant ecosystem
* A significant impact is likely to occur on another species and the study area is likely to support an important population of the squirrel glider
* No assessment of cumulative impacts in the local area (required in DGRs) on Koalas or loss of bushland and habitat
* There are no north-south wildlife corridors to allow wildlife to move between all unmined areas, only a token east west corridor along sparsely vegetated ground.
* There will be no rehabilitation of the land, just spread mulch and let natural seed revegetate the site


Visual impacts -

The EIS has stated that there will be limited visual impacts on residents; however the properties next door and residents who live on higher elevations will overlook the operations of the mine. Which has currently been a picturesque bush landscape?

Noise Impacts -

Noise impacts will be of the operation, truck movements and possible changes to airport noises once the natural hills are taken away. There will be an increase of everyday noise for the surrounding residents, there will be the noise of the everyday operation of the sand mine, including the times of operation including and not limited to transportation and loading 5am - 6pm Monday to Friday and 7am to 4pm Saturdays.

On either side of the proposed sand mine entrance there are 25 entrances to homes, all of which will be negatively impacted by the proposed changes to Cabbage Tree Road and the entrance to the site. All of these homes will suffer with increased noise of trucks accelerating and decelerating in and out of the site from 5am.

When the natural sound buffer of the sand hills is taken away there will be an increase in nosie of the airport and RAAF base operations, this could result in the RAAF needing to re-evaluate the noise mapping.

Traffic and access impacts -

There are 25 homes within 500 meters of the site entrance, Cabbage Tree Road is a 90km road and already incredibly dangerous for residents safely turning in and out of properties. At present residents are already limited with exit strategies to escape an accident if other motorists are overtaking or do not see a car slowing down to turn into a driveway.


Air Quality/ health -

With any mine or quarry operation there is a risk of increased dust and diesel emissions. We know that dust travels as per Dr Van Steenis, Visit to the Hunter Valley: Urgent Reform of Coal Industry Operating standards; Children living 1.5km from a coal mine have 33%risk of Asthma, at 3km the risk is 22% and at 5km it is 12%. The quarry will be as close as 20 meters to a resident's boundary. The product that will be mined is classed as high grade silica sand; there is a real risk of not only silicosis but also other related respiratory diseases, Asthma, COPD and chronic rhinitis.

The airborne particle/dust study seems to be flawed. It was carried out with a wind speed of 3.1 m/s whereas we are regularly subjected to winds >70kmh i.e. >20m/s. Real established risk of sand dust silicosis was dismissed in the report, which is of great concern to all surrounding residents


Socio Economic -

It was suggested that that local residents keep a diary of significant dust, traffic and other events that effect us, why should the onus be on us, given the back ground of the tender process and the company involved, how Can we trust their use of the operation and adherence to proper policy and procedure with regards to the safe guarding of the community. Why should we have to bring non compliance to their attention? These areas should not be monitored via a complaint system, these things should be addresses and mitigated beforehand....

Maximum of 6 staff employed

Aboriginal and Cultural heritage

One site was noted as significant, where they found 66 objects, it was noted that this area had no historically value in teh EIS.
I am the co-owner of a property on Cabbage Tree Road. I am extremely concerned about the proposal for a sand mine next to my home which will be in operation for 15 years. The excessive noise, the risk of sand dust silicosis and the hundreds of heavy truck movements from early in the morning on an already busy and congested road, will have a detrimental impact on my quality of life and the lives of my family and grandchildren. Also the deaxeleration lane proposed will be at the front of my property which will cause huge safety concerns for getting in and out of my property safely. I am concerned about my health, as I had a stroke and major heart problem and suffer with stress issues. I am worried about all the extra stress and how this will affect the health of myself and my family. I am also in the Red Zone for the toxic water and ground contamination from the RAAF base which is affecting the water aquifers as the water table is so high in this area. I care greatly for the environment of the fauna, especially the koalas that live in the proposed sand mine site. They are endangered and their habitat and environment needs to be kept safe and secure for future generations. The sand mine as well as been in the Red Zone, is and will greatly impact and significantly devalue my property and greatly affect the health, quality of life and well being of my family and many other residents.

What we want the Department of Planning to do?
Knock back the inappropriate development
There are five other sand mines in the area; we do not need another one in an inappropriate location.
In the event it is approved, strict monitoring AS WELL AS PROACTIVE MEASURES PUT IN PLACE to address issues of drainage, water table levels, dust, noise as well as a buffer of 500 meters from any property boundary must be implemented to protect the peaceful enjoyment and quality of life we currently enjoy. As the proposal currently stands, parts of the mine encroach within 20 meters of some properties, this is not acceptable for local families. In addition, proper barriers by way of 5 meter high soil walls or proper acoustic fences are to be erected on the perimeter of the site. A height of 5 meters is necessary to ensure the bulk of the noise from the site is captured taking into account types of heavy equipment and vehicles proposed to be used. Proper shielding of light from any machinery and buildings must also be sufficiently diffused so as not to impede on the local resident's and their homes. This will ensure the aesthetic, acoustic and general privacy of local residents is maintained or at least preserved to some extent.

I am the co-owner of a property on Cabbage Tree Road. I am extremely concerned about the proposal for a sand mine next to my home which will be in operation for 15 years. The excessive noise, the risk of sand dust silicosis and the hundreds of heavy truck movements from early in the morning on an already busy and congested road, will have a detrimental impact on my quality of life and the lives of my family and grandchildren. Also the acceleration lane proposed will be at the front of my property which will cause huge safety concerns for getting in and out of my property safely. I am concerned about my health, as I suffer with a rare condition, and well being of myself, family and residents that it will impact. I am also in the Red Zone for the toxic water and ground contamination from the RAAF base which is affecting the water aquifers as the water table is so high in this area. I care greatly for the environment of the fauna, especially the koalas that live in the proposed sand mine site. They are endangered and their habitat and environment needs to be kept safe and secure for future generations. The sand mine as well as been in the Red Zone is and will greatly impact and significantly devalue my property and greatly affect the health, quality of life and well being of my family and many other residents.
In 2014, Port Stephens Council controversially awarded a contract for quarrying of 4.6 million tonnes of sand over 15 years at 398 Cabbage Tree Road, Williamtown. It would remove critical Koala habitat and other at risk species, will destroy the quality of life of our family and local residents, and would add hundreds of heavy truck movements to an already overloaded and unsuitable carriageway within a 90km/h zone. The risk of sand dust silicosis is real and threatens the health of our community and their children. The removal of 54 hectares of vegetation would see a major disruption to the sensitive charge and discharge rates of the tomago sandbed aquifer - the trees effectively act as `pumps' to the aquifer, regulating the entire ecosystem. The removal of that vegetation and flattening of the land would remove a critical mitigating buffer zone to the RAAF base and its activities directly to the North and North East of the proposed site. All of this for a quarry supplying a product which is not in short supply, is readily available at the 5 other sand mines already located within 10km of the proposed site, employing a measly 3 to 5 people with any royalties going back to the council for their use and disposal and not necessarily to the rate payers.

Finally, the proposed site now sits directly in the middle of a declared `red zone' contamination area. An area governed by strict precautionary and cautionary principles dictated by NSW EPA and NSW Chief Scientist, Professor, Maryanne O'Kane. The proponents have failed to take any of this into account in their submission.

The means must justify the end and the unknown and known significant risks to this significant environment can only be avoided by refusing this proposal. We reserve all our rights and entitlements against the NSW Department of Planning and any decision makers in relation to any future loss or damages (including future health claims) as a result of the proposed sand mine should the proposal be approved.













Environmental Impacts -

Koalas

The Port Stephens area is an important population for the Koala, at a state and federal level. This is recognised by the federal Department of the Environment and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. The proposal will wipe out preferred Koala Habitat, a total of 10 koalas were found on site as noted in the EIS, this area is imperative to the survival and interbreeding of the population.

There is no formal offset or offset calculations using the NSW Bio banking calculator have been included. 

Water

There are unknown effects to the Tomago sand beds. The native vegetation acts as the main stabiliser of the water table, removing the vegetation and flattening the dunes will cause a natural increase in the water table. A characteristic that in the current situation and the Red Zone is not acceptable. Once the natural undulation is flattened, this will cause further drainage problems affecting nearby properties, if and when we have the next rain deluge.

Historically the previous mining on the site for Routille and Zircon the RZM mine, was shut down in the early 90's, this is due to the operation bringing up arsenic and heavy metals to the water table, Hunter water and residents bore supply.


Other Environmental

* Water dependant ecosystem
* A significant impact is likely to occur on another species and the study area is likely to support an important population of the squirrel glider
* No assessment of cumulative impacts in the local area (required in DGRs) on Koalas or loss of bushland and habitat
* There are no north-south wildlife corridors to allow wildlife to move between all unmined areas, only a token east west corridor along sparsely vegetated ground.
* There will be no rehabilitation of the land, just spread mulch and let natural seed revegetate the site


Visual impacts -

The EIS has stated that there will be limited visual impacts on residents; however the properties next door and residents who live on higher elevations will overlook the operations of the mine. Which has currently been a picturesque bush landscape?

Noise Impacts -

Noise impacts will be of the operation, truck movements and possible changes to airport noises once the natural hills are taken away. There will be an increase of everyday noise for the surrounding residents, there will be the noise of the everyday operation of the sand mine, including the times of operation including and not limited to transportation and loading 5am - 6pm Monday to Friday and 7am to 4pm Saturdays.

On either side of the proposed sand mine entrance there are 25 entrances to homes, all of which will be negatively impacted by the proposed changes to Cabbage Tree Road and the entrance to the site. All of these homes will suffer with increased noise of trucks accelerating and decelerating in and out of the site from 5am.

When the natural sound buffer of the sand hills is taken away there will be an increase in nosie of the airport and RAAF base operations, this could result in the RAAF needing to re-evaluate the noise mapping.

Traffic and access impacts -

There are 25 homes within 500 meters of the site entrance, Cabbage Tree Road is a 90km road and already incredibly dangerous for residents safely turning in and out of properties. At present residents are already limited with exit strategies to escape an accident if other motorists are overtaking or do not see a car slowing down to turn into a driveway.


Air Quality/ health -

With any mine or quarry operation there is a risk of increased dust and diesel emissions. We know that dust travels as per Dr Van Steenis, Visit to the Hunter Valley: Urgent Reform of Coal Industry Operating standards; Children living 1.5km from a coal mine have 33%risk of Asthma, at 3km the risk is 22% and at 5km it is 12%. The quarry will be as close as 20 meters to a resident's boundary. The product that will be mined is classed as high grade silica sand; there is a real risk of not only silicosis but also other related respiratory diseases, Asthma, COPD and chronic rhinitis.

The airborne particle/dust study seems to be flawed. It was carried out with a wind speed of 3.1 m/s whereas we are regularly subjected to winds >70kmh i.e. >20m/s. Real established risk of sand dust silicosis was dismissed in the report, which is of great concern to all surrounding residents


Socio Economic -

It was suggested that that local residents keep a diary of significant dust, traffic and other events that effect us, why should the onus be on us, given the back ground of the tender process and the company involved, how Can we trust their use of the operation and adherence to proper policy and procedure with regards to the safe guarding of the community. Why should we have to bring non compliance to their attention? These areas should not be monitored via a complaint system, these things should be addresses and mitigated beforehand....

Maximum of 6 staff employed

Aboriginal and Cultural heritage

One site was noted as significant, where they found 66 objects, it was noted that this area had no historically value in teh EIS.


What we want the Department of Planning to do?
Knock back the inappropriate development
There are five other sand mines in the area; we do not need another one in an inappropriate location.
In the event it is approved, strict monitoring AS WELL AS PROACTIVE MEASURES PUT IN PLACE to address issues of drainage, water table levels, dust, noise as well as a buffer of 500 meters from any property boundary must be implemented to protect the peaceful enjoyment and quality of life we currently enjoy. As the proposal currently stands, parts of the mine encroach within 20 meters of some properties, this is not acceptable for local families. In addition, proper barriers by way of 5 meter high soil walls or proper acoustic fences are to be erected on the perimeter of the site. A height of 5 meters is necessary to ensure the bulk of the noise from the site is captured taking into account types of heavy equipment and vehicles proposed to be used. Proper shielding of light from any machinery and buildings must also be sufficiently diffused so as not to impede on the local resident's and their homes. This will ensure the aesthetic, acoustic and general privacy of local residents is maintained or at least preserved to some extent.

The sand mine will clear important Koala habitat. 2. The Indigenous cultural concern for the land has not been reccognised. 3 The mine will be within the groundwater catchment for Hunter drinking water. 4.It is within the red zone of contaminated chemicals from the RAAF 5.There are serious health implications for respiratory illness.5.The sand mine will create an extra 140 truck movements per day to an already busy road, and as the loaded trucks can only exit left past our place, after going around the roundabout, they will pass us again, making 280 extra movements.6. The sand mine will have an adverse effect on local residents..

this is my submission:
My first concern is that this development is in the red contamination site.

I have major concerns over dust emmissions to the local residents .

This is a lot of trees to clear in a koala habitat already under threat from a major fire recently.

This will increase truck movements on what is already a busy road.

I would like to address they way in which this application has been handled by the local council,ie.transfer of owners that have a questionable reputation.

Noise will be a concern to the residents who will be very close to this sand mine

As a local resident and founding member and committee person of the WIlliamtown and surrounds residents action group I am opposing the sand mining proposal in cabbage tree road Williamtown

This mine is 40 metres from my property and unlike some people I am fortunate.

I am opposing the mine in regard to the following issues

These issues are in no order of importance

Consultation proces
The tender process
Health issues
Location of the mine
Noise
Environmental issues
Socio economic issues
Treatment of aboriginal sacred sites
Traffic and access

It is above my station to pretend that I know intricate medical, technical or environmental detail in relation to these issues but however our community group has engaged and spoken to experts in the relevant fields.

From those discussions and reports I have drawn conclusions and gleaned information to support my arguments

It is hoped that those reports and information submitted by the experts are treated with due care and respect

I apologise for they tone of the previous comment but it is very difficult not to be cynical in regard to the outcome when all along we the residents have been advised by some people connected with the mine and in mining that the approval is a foregone conclusion

Following a recent community meeting with representatives of the planning department and comments made in that meeting the perception of the community is that that scenario seems quite likely

The consultation process I believe was flawed in so much as:
When council originally bought the site and deemed it to be a sand mine there was not any community consultation

When cqp representatives did their door knock of a reported nine properties back in February 2015 they were (Murray and Drew) telling people that we won't stop the mine it is a foregone conclusion.

Question: Why have not the current leases holders Williamtown Sands-been required to do community consultation because we would like to know how they (without experience or equipment) intend to operate the mine.

The tender process is well documented but how the current group finished up with the lease is still shrouded in mystery and secrecy. In this regard, a segment done one national abc radio by Ane Arnold should be compulsory listening for the approval panel.

When council acquired the site they commissioned a report from a company called RPS into the site

That report identified three major areas of concern with the proposal

That were
Sacred sites
Threatened flora and fauna. And
Extraction issues

None of which I believe have been properly addressed in the EIS from Umwell

My family was Involved with the early settlement of the soldiers point area of port Stephens and during that time and up to quite recently we had as neighbours and obviously grew up with an indigenous family. One of my relatives married an aboriginal lady from the area so with connection and empathy i find it imperative that our heritage be preserved and fully respected. Not done in this eis

An unfortunate recent event (the raaf contamination issue) has cast further doubt on extraction issues

My property like the mine site is in the red /contamination zone.

The authorities have informed us that we cannot continue with our vegetable garden (how deep does a carrot go) we cannot eat our chook eggs (how deep does a hen forage) we cannot use our spear point (for fear of spreading contamination) so how can anybody expect to be able to mine the area
The report submitted has failed to take this issue into account

The socio economic issues are well dealt with in a report submitted from Dr Patricia Gillard dated January 18 clearly shows up the inadequacies of the Umwell report

Environmentally this proposal is a disaster waiting to happen

Everything you read about in relation to the tomago sandbeds area suggests how fragile and important they are.

Some of the relevant documents found are
The nsw state groundwater protection policy 1998 and
The nsw department department of primary industry--office of water June 2012 which identifies in the section on tomago sand beds flora which is peculiar or unique to the to age sand beds

Port Stephens council tree register identifies species of trees in the mine site which should be listed on their protection register but are not.
Section 4.10 of the port Stephens council tree technical specifications September 2014 identifies the area as a valuable corridor for habitat--it should be protected

This proposal will probably clear most or all of these species with the only rehabilitation suggested being to spread mulch

This proposal will wipe out a preferred koala habitat. This habitat is recognised at both federal and state government levels

There are basically no worthwhile wildlife corridors to allow the wildlife to move between unlined areas

Any change in the topography of the area will be disastrous
Should the hill and trees be removed as planned the consequences will be
Flooding
Major noise increase from both the raaf base and machinery
Not to mention the spread of errant silicon particles

Recently the raaf exhibited and presented an EIS in relation to the consequences of their new jets

This proposal will compromise that EIS and we residents will
demand the right to revisit the raaf EIS in relation to the change of topography. This reassessment should take place prior to any assessment of the proposal

Advice in the experts findings on bio-diversity suggest the proposal is totally inadequate

Economically, for us landowners the outcome will be disastrous with the mine causing a major decline in land values

Perhaps the mine owners could be forced to buy us all out

For some residents the visual impacts of this proposal will be quite disheartening having a lovely rural outlook spoilt
We moved here for a lifestyle change not to have a sand mine thrust down our throats

This mine has the potential to be another James Hardie.
High grade silica sand is to be mined-- we do not know which grade however--which is important as to what safety precautions need to be taken.

This area as we all know seemingly except for the proponents is a high wind area

If Umwell took the time to access the data available at the Williamtown meteorological station adjacent the site they would have realised that their calculations for the particle / dust study are severely flawed wing some 17m/s out

Also the real established risk of sand dust silicosis was dismissed in the report--this action according to expert opinion and data on the issue--makes the action of not assessing the risk verging on negligence

There is not only a risk of silicosis but other respiratory diseases such as asthma copd and chronic rhinitis


When they establish the grade of silicon and taking into account the wind velocities of the area I would like to know what safety precautions they will be offering the residents and their animals

Because acute silicosis takes some years to develop and in cases does lead to death--we cannot afford to adopt the "suck and see" attitude. For some that may be too late

We must remember this mine is in a residential area.

The consistent noise coming from this site will be intolerable

We don't know noise levels from the vortex air separator or mobile plant especially with all the buffers removed

There will also be a major increase in noise from the airport runway

There will be a significant lift in the noise from increased truck movements

Currently we are suffering severely from 24 hour sand truck movements both to and from mines.

Surely operations are happening outside permissible hours

The truck occurrence is only going to intensify with more movements being sought by a nearby mine and with a proposed extra 140 truck movements per day from this mine I don't know how we are expected to tolerate the noise, difficulty in accessing cabbage tree road ( which now is fraught with danger) and I hate to think what is going to happen at the roundabout where cabbage tree road meets nelson bay road.

It takes a loaded truck now on average 22.3 seconds to navigate the roundabout

This roundabout has very high traffic frequency and these trucks will have a massive impact on the flow of traffic

We would the cumulative affect of these trucks on cabbage tree road to be taken into account as at my property and others we will cop the trucks passing at high revs just having left the mine and after negotiating the roundabout at nelson bay road they again pass our property at the usual high speed on their way to the freeway

So basically we are going to be suffering loud truck movement every few minutes 24 hours a day.

Nobody should be expected to tolerate that situation

In summary this mine is in a totally unacceptable location in fact in a residential area with some boundaries being common and others 20 and 40 metres away.

The mine is only going to employ -according tho the proponents 5 people

I found in a previous mine application the following condition imposed by the authorities

"The operation of this mine should not impact on the lifestyle currently being enjoyed by the local residents"

This mine will destroy ours

Why isn't that condition attached to this proposal ?

I put it to you the panel members--would you like to or would you like your family to live adjacent a high grade silica sand mine ?

More to the point-- would you like one thrust upon you ?

What would I / we like to happen
Revisit the recent EIS undertaken by the raaf
Obviously the mine to be refused

Should the mine be approved
500 metre setbacks be enforced
Appropriate acoustic walls be built around the mine perimeter
An alternate road be constructed to take the excessive truck movements off cabbage tree road
Appropriate shielding be constructed to stop the escape of silicon particles
A competent and active monitoring body be established
Light emission be curtailed
An assessment on what safety devices equipment need to be issued

alternatively the proponents be forced to buy us out

The means must justify the end and the unknown and known significant risks to this significant environment can only be avoided by refusing this proposal.
I / we reserve all our rights and entitlements against the nsw department of planning and any decision makers in relation to any future loss or damages (including any future health claims) as a result of the proposed sand mine should the proposal be approved.

I totally object to the proposed Cabbage Tree Road Sand Quarry in Williamtown.
I totally oppose the destruction of Koala Habitat that will occur if this proposal goes ahead. This area is of high conservation value and the destruction of fauna and flora in this location will cause irreparable damage to Koala Habitat and the environment and our drinking water supply, and could pose serious health problems. It is estimated that there will be a huge impact for the environment with an increase in trucks in this locality. Cabbage Tree Road and Nelson Bay Road already carries enough trucks so a further increase of truck movements in this area will have an impact on the environment, tourism and the general feel of the area. I stand up for Koalas and speak from the heart, please listen and reject this proposal, I am a Port Stephens resident and I don't want further destruction of our environment.

To Whom it may Concern.
My family are located in the suburb of Salt Ash, not far from where the proposed sand mine is to be located.
We live a very short distance from an existing sand mine and the trucks using this mine as well as other sand mines through out the area, use Nelson Bay rd as part of the route to their destination.
We were well aware of the sand mines when we moved to the area, so we are not in a position to object to any of the mining activities surrounding us, however we see first hand, the volume of trucks moving day and night to and from these mines, and to locate an operation similar to this around existing homes would confirm the total disregard already shown to other property owners in the area.
This project is not suitable to be located amongst residential properties, and to even consider an application like this is not only a demonstration of how little our local, state and federal governments care for its people ,but how corrupt these organisations are.
The flow of trucks from the site, 12,000 + truck moves a year to remove the volume of sand, is completely unrealistic, as the roads are already inadequate and dangerous and already overloaded with heavy vehicles travelling to and from existing mines in the area. To add to this would require a duplication of the existing road to handle the additional movements.
Lets not let the safety of the residents in the area be put in jeopardy for the sake of a bit of sand, only intended to make rich men richer.
Also in light of recent contamination of our area by RAAF, all properties within the investigation zone have had there properties 149-5 certificates, altered state that " the land is within the RAAF Base Williamtown environmental investigation project investigation area. The Department of defence is undertaking a long term environmental investigation and assessment of the groundwater beneath the Raaf Williamtown Base site and surrounds.
The Department of defence and NSW EPA are leading the investigations testing is being undertaken in affected areas and residents are being advised to avoid drinking bore water, eating fish caught in the Tilligary Creek or Fullerton Cove or consuming eggs from backyard chickens".
Now if sand is to be removed from the proposed site, then this amendment to the 149-5 certificate must then be placed on the 149-5 certificates of all the properties receiving the sand from the site as well as the restrictions also noted, ie fishing, water and chicken egg consumption.
This change has been placed on our properties without even testing being carried out to confirm any contamination so the same restrictions MUST be imposed of the customers of the proposed sand mine.
In addition to this, the area is known to have had significance in Aboriginal History and to simply mine this significance into trucks would show a complete disregard for any ancestors of the lands original inhabitants and the nations indigenous people in general.
This land is also a known koala habitat and to destroy this would be detrimental to the population of Australia as a whole.
Many millions of dollars are spent trying to fix the mistakes of the past for our countries native species, yet here are people hell bent on destroying what is one of few remaining habitats left, all for the sake of personal greed.
So as far as" knocking the thorns off " this ridiculous application go, please feel free to forward those thorns to the applicants and maybe suggest a suitable place for them to stick them.
Regards
Nick Marshall.

i wish to make comment on the above proposal. there are several issues that i feel have not been investigated to the fullest extent.

pertinent points that require consideration
- where will topsoil stockpiles be located? existing tree vegetation will require removal as the whole site is covered with bush / forest. whether it is natural, planted or regrowth, the loss of more vegetation on the site is not preferred.
- the 'need' for more sand extraction sites is hard to justify, given there are several existing sand mines operating in the area.
- whilst dry-screening will reduce the need for water onsite, this process will create excessive dust from the screening process. will this be housed in a building to contain dust particles?
- report states standard operating hours, it also requests extensions from 5am to 10pm, how is this extension granted and what is the notification period required?
- how will trucks re-enter site travelling from Nelson Bay Road. there is no mention of the vehicle movements to enter the site from this direction. will a U-turn bay be constructed?
- there are several wetlands in the extraction areas. the term 'wetlands' implies that these areas are wet and therefore have a shallow water table level. the EIS states that no excavation will take place below the water table, is this the case in the wetland areas?
- there is no mention of the PFOS and PFOA contamination risks in any documentation. granted this has been raised since the bulk of the reports were finalised. is testing being carried out on the site at the moment to determine the existing contamination risk as well as the potential for future contamination given the area is in the RED ZONE at present.

this proposal should not continue to construction as the risks are too great. Risk to the Hunter Water catchment, risk of contamination from PFOS and PFOA rendering the sand unusable where it hay come into contact with people / animals, proximity to existing dwellings, etc.

darren mckimm

Jillian Lye
6 Brandon Close
RAYMOND TERRACE
NSW 2324

Monday, 15 February 2016
Department of Planning and Environment
Attention: Director of resource Assessments
GPO Box 39
NSW 2000

Cabbage Tree Road Sand Quarry- Williamtown - Development Application No.SSD6125

I have been a resident of Port Stephens for over 20 years where I have been actively involved in the local planning process and are aware of current Local, State and Federal environmental planning legislation including the protection of our unique local natural ecosystems and endangered wildlife habitats.
Some of my objections to this DA - SSD 6125 are listed below.

1. Development Application located in the `red zone'
The proposed site sits directly in the middle of the declared `red zone' contamination area, Williamtown. This DA should not be up for assessment until the contamination issue has been resolved and outcomes have been assessed and remediation measures put in place. This area is presently governed by strict precautionary and cautionary principles dictated by NSW EPA and NSW Chief Scientist, Professor, Maryanne O'Kane. This Application has failed to address this important issue and therefore should be refused on this premise alone.
2. Questionable leasing process
This application was preceded by Port Stephens Council in 2014 controversially awarding a contract for quarrying of 4.6 million tonnes of sand over 15 years at 398 Cabbage Tree Road, Williamtown. The absence of transparency and accountability was apparent in the planning process dating from 2014 for this proposal. This current application needs to address the previous lack of Port Stephens Council's assessment process.
3. Water
The potential effects to the Tomago sand beds are unknown. The native vegetation acts as the main stabiliser of the water table, removing the vegetation and flattening the dunes will cause a natural increase in the water table. Once the natural undulation is flattened, this will cause further drainage problems affecting nearby properties.
It is imperative to note that the previous mining on the site for Routille and Zircon the RZM mine, was shut down in the early 90's, this is due to the operation bringing up arsenic and heavy metals to the water table, Hunter water and residents bore supply.
4. Critical Koala Habitat
This development, if approved, will remove critical koala habitat. The Port Stephens area is an important population for the Koala, at a State and Federal level. This is recognised by the Federal Department of the Environment and the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. The proposal will wipe out preferred Koala Habitat, a total of 10 koalas were found on site as noted in the EIS, this area is vital to the survival and interbreeding of the Port Stephens Koala population.
5. Other Environmental Concerns
The consultant "Umwelt" report in volume 2 - Appendies 1&2 indicated undoubtedly the rich biodiversity on this 176 hectare site that "must be retained". Many species of flora and fauna are listed many of which are endangered and vulnerable. Removing such an area would significantly impact on water dependant ecosystem including the koala and squirrel glider.
There are no assessment of cumulative impacts in the local area (required in DGRs) on Koalas or loss of bushland and habitat. There are no north-south wildlife corridors to allow wildlife to move between all unmined areas, only a token east west corridor along sparsely vegetated ground.
6. Noise Impacts
Noise impacts will be of the operation, truck movements and possible changes to airport noises once the natural hills are taken away. There will be an increase of everyday noise for the surrounding residents, there will be the noise of the everyday operation of the sand mine, including the times of operation including and not limited to transportation and loading 5am - 6pm Monday to Friday and 7am to 4pm Saturdays.
On either side of the proposed sand mine entrance there are 25 entrances to homes, all of which will be negatively impacted by the proposed changes to Cabbage Tree Road and the entrance to the site. All of these homes will suffer with increased noise of trucks accelerating and decelerating in and out of the site from 5am.
When the natural sound buffer of the sand hills is taken away there will be an increase in nosie of the airport and RAAF base operations, this could result in the RAAF needing to re-evaluate the noise mapping.
7. Traffic and access impacts
There are 25 homes within 500 meters of the site entrance, Cabbage Tree Road is a 90km road and already incredibly dangerous for residents safely turning in and out of properties. At present residents are already limited with exit strategies to escape an accident if other motorists are overtaking or do not see a car slowing down to turn into a driveway.
8. Air Quality/ health
With any mine or quarry operation there is a risk of increased dust and diesel emissions. Recent evidence based studies confirm the health risks associated with residents living in close proximity to mines and quarries. It is understood that residents will be as close as 20 meters in this instance to the quarry. The product that will be mined here is classed as high grade silica sand; there is a real risk of not only silicosis but also other related respiratory diseases, Asthma, COPD and chronic rhinitis.

From review of documentation it appears that the airborne particle/dust study seems to be flawed. It was carried out with a wind speed of 3.1 m/s whereas the area in question is regularly subjected to winds >70kmh i.e. >20m/s. Real established risk of sand dust silicosis was dismissed in the report, which is of great concern to all health and wellbeing of surrounding residents.




9. Aboriginal and Cultural Heritage
Port Stephens has a rich indigenous Heritage. The Worimi people have walked this land well before Europeans arrived in the early. One area on the site was noted as significant, where they found 66 objects, it was noted that this area had no historically value in the EIS. This alone would make this site significant and worthy of comprehensive study and documentation to enrich the collective knowledge of the Worimi culture. This knowledge is not only important to the people of port Stephens but it is important to understanding our diverse environment and its connection to land.

10. Over supply of sand
Finally this DA would be an unnecessary exploitation of an environmentally sensitive site for an over-supplied market. There are 5 other sand mines already located within 10km of the proposed site, employing a mere 3 to 5 people with any royalties going back to the council for their use and disposal and not necessarily to the benefit of the community.


Conclusion
The proposed sites location in the `red zone' and its previous lack of transparency and accountability make this application questionable for planning assessment. Also there are already five other sand mines operating in the Port Stephens area over supplying the current market and it would be at the greater expense to the environment and the community if this application were to be approved in this inappropriate location.

We need to make smart sustainable planning decisions that benefit all. Ecologically sustainable development requires effective integration of economic and environmental considerations based on facts and analysis in the decision making process.

On the points raised above I would be asking you to refuse this development Application.

To Whom It May Concern
My name is Lesley Holly and I have lived on Cabbage Tree Road, Williamtown, NSW, 2318 for 17 years. I live on 5 acres and we moved to our property to bring up our children in a country environment so they would learn that eggs come from chickens and milk comes from cows and not from the supermarket shelf. We have had horses, sheep, ducks, rabbits, chickens, guinea pigs, birds and dogs and grown our own vegetables and fruit. We also have a lot of wild life visit our property, some to live and some to pass through, such as kangaroos, koalas, echidnas, blue tongue and bearded dragon lizards, ducks and many species of birds.
I am against the approval of the Cabbage Tree Road Sand Quarry for the following reasons:-
1. The health of myself, my family, our livestock and neighbours is of huge concern to me. An everyday coating of extremely fine sand dust to my property where my family and I, our livestock and our neighbours will breathe it in will inevitably cause health problems. It won't be a question of if, but when. We moved here to have a clean, country lifestyle and I object to a sand quarry being approved just one kilometre from our home.
2. The land has been zoned as protected for koala habitat and forms part of a koala corridor. The impact of the sand quarry will be devastating to the local koala and wildlife population.
3. Destruction of the vegetation and sand hills on the land will increase the noise from the RAAF base.
4. There are many questions around the integrity of the process granting the lease that haven't been answered. Simply from the zoning of the land, the lease should not have been considered, let alone granted.
5. The integrity of the process has been referred to ICAC.
6 Cabbage Tree Road is a 90km/h speed zoned road. At times it is already treacherous getting in and out of my driveway and with so many truck movements already on Cabbage Tree Road, I object to 120 per day more being added so close to my home together with the noise of trucks accelerating and decelerating in and out of the quarry as early as 5am.
7. The approval of the Cabbage Tree Road Sand Quarry is not in the best interest of the community. There is no benefit to the community from this quarry.
8. The land will not be restored to its current state. The damage that will be done will not be able to be rectified. The amount of money that will be needed to 'restore' the land will exceed the amount gained by the lessee, therefore, not viable.
9. Currently there is a contamination issue of the ground water and it is not known what the effects of the quarry will be on the water table.

I would respectfully request that the Department:-

i. Refuse the development. The land is not zoned for this use and is zoned for protection of koala habitat and corridor.
ii. Look in to the integrity of the process. If it is not in the Department's authority to do anything about the integrity of the process, then to refer it on to the appropriate department who does have authority to bring this matter to account.
iii. Refuse the development. The quarry is not in the best interests of the community.
iv. Refuse the development. Should the development be approved:
a. Put measures in place for strict monitoring of operations on the site to ensure the dust is contained;
b. Put measures in place for strict monitoring of noise;
c. Put measures in place to ensure that proper barriers are erected on the perimeter of the site such as 5 metre high soil walls, or proper acoustic fencing;
d. Put measures in place to shield local residents and their homes from light from machinery and buildings;
e. Ensure that the road is properly upgraded to include turning lanes and appropriate speed zones for local residents' safety.

Thank you for looking into this on our behalf.

Yours faithfully

Lesley Holly
500 Cabbage Tree Road
WILLIAMTOWN NSW 2318

I do not agree with this proposal based on the environmental impact that will occur. Not only is this area and residents already suffering from the impact of the RAAF contamination, but so is the environment. As far as research goes the effects on wild life are not yet fully understood.
This area is a native environment for rare frogs, koalas but a sacred land for aboriginals - the founders of this land.
I am from a commercial fishing family and I have grave concerns about any further disruption to the land or the aquifer that will indeed cause further movement to the low lying water table that is directly proportional to our fishing grounds.
I believe based on studies produced that any movement of ground topsoil and or below including removal of trees is a direct insult to injury to the surround of Cabbage Tree Rd, Williamtown.
Increase of heavy vehicle movements is detrimental to the wildlife and the community that have chosen to live in a semi rural setting. Quite serenity will be disrupted by exhaust compression brakes and truck engines revving engines trying to enter and exit onto an already known difficult driveway navigation.
As a resident who has already been through issues of trucks travelling at excessive speeds on a semi rural road - oppose any such sand mine quarry with in the current context promoted to date.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to submit my concerns about the proposed Cabbage Tree Road sand quarry. These concerns relate to environmental damage, negative effects on the local community, and inadequate compensation to the community for the extracted economic rents.

First, environmental damage. The sand mine will clear important habitat for the Port Stephens koala. It exists within a groundwater catchment area that supplies drinking water to the Hunter. It is also located within an area contaminated by chemicals from the Williamtown RAAF base. There remains significant uncertainty around the health implications of this, and so precaution should be urged.

Second, negative externalities. The sand mine will lead to up to 140 additional truck movements per day, affecting road congestion and safety for the neighbouring residents. There is also the potential for the sand mine to create serious health problems in the local community, including respiratory illnesses. Finally, the sand mine will reduce the amenity value of the bushland, and associated wildlife habitats.

Third, lack of adequate compensation. Sand mines generate significant economic rents. These rents are created by the sale of a national, public asset, which is owned by all Australians. No detail has been given of how they will be appropriately compensated for this sale, particularly those directly affected by the mine. Bear in mind that in Norway, over 75 cents of of every dollar of oil sold is repatriated to all Norwegians through their sovereign wealth fund. What is the associated number for this mine?

Please don't hesitate to contact me if you would like to discuss this further.

Yours sincerely

Dr Sam Wills
Research Fellow in Economics, Oxford University

I do not want the sand mine to go ahead. I have attached a letter.

Please read the reasons for my objection to the proposal.

Please see attached document

Please see attached document that forms my submission.

Submission presented below as PDF

Dear Commissioner,

The following submission is with respect to the proposed Cabbage Tree Road Sand Quarry development. My name is Dr John Van Der Kallen. I am a physician in the Hunter area. I have a number of concerns as outlined below.

AIR QUALITY

Air quality issues have been addressed in the submission however the impact on air quality have been under represented. In December 2015 the National Environment Protection Measures (NEPM) meeting set new guideline regarding air quality. In NSW there are new guideline regarding air quality. The acceptable PM2.5 and PM10 levels have been altered. "Ministers agreed to adopt reporting standards for annual average and 24-hour PM2.5 particles of 8ug/m3 and 25ug/m3 respectively, aiming to move to 7ug/m3 and 20ug/m3 respectively by 2025. Ministers also agreed to establish an annual average standard for PM10 particles of 25ug/m3". Consequently, the assessment criteria for the project are outdated and need to be revised.

The statistics provided in the submission already show that the PM10 levels in Stockton (29.1 ug/m3) are above the agreed annual average. Further data (attached) from the EPA website show that in 2015 the average monthly PM10 levels in Stockton, Mayfield and Carrington were over the agreed average value. The submission states that this project will increase PM10 levels by approximately 3ug/m3. This is serious health concern as elevated PM10 levels are related to increased respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease and mortality.

Insufficient data has been submitted regarding the PM2.5 levels. The focus has been on PM10 and TSP but not PM2.5. Increased PM2.5 levels cause an increase in cardiovascular disease and cancer. The current levels of PM2.5 need to be quantified and provided in the submission. PM2.5 is primarily derived from emissions such as diesel fuels. The submission states that there will be 63 truck movements per day. This will increase PM2.5 levels and this will have an effect on the local community.

I note that 2 monitors will be set up to monitor air quality. This data should be made available in real time on a web based format.

I also note that :
"Quarry operations will be subject to a staged shutdown of equipment based on rolling 24 hour average PM10 concentrations, PM10 concentration spikes and adverse meteorological conditions. "
However, the levels of PM10 that will trigger a staged shutdown have not been defined. This needs to be clarified and made available to the local community.


GREENHOUSE GASES AND IMPACT ON GLOBAL WARMING

In December 2015 Australia committed to a decrease in global emissions of 26-28% by 2030. Last year Australia's emissions increased. Consequently we are not achieving our goal to reduce emissions. Any new project that will increase emissions needs to take into account it's effects on carbon emissions. This project will increase emissions. Consequently there should be a provision for carbon offsets in this proposal.

REHABILITATION

"Williamtown Sand Syndicate Pty Ltd is committed to the effective rehabilitation and closure of the Cabbage Tree Road Quarry at the end of its life."
In the proposal it was not clear whether there is an adequate bond for rehabilitation of the site. Adequate provisions should be made for a bond so that rehabilitation of the site can occur independent of the success of the enterprise.
CONCLUSION
As a physician I have a number of health concerns regarding this project. Firstly, air quality will be affected by the project in an area where the air quality is already some of the worst in NSW. This will have health impacts. Adequate monitoring needs to be publically available. Air quality changes that will trigger a staged shutdown need to be defined.
Secondly, carbon emissions are causing global warming and carbon offsets should be made to make the project carbon neutral.
Finally, adequate funds should be allocated, in the form of a bond, to allow adequate rehabilitation of the site.
As stated in the submission: "The Project has been designed to balance resource utilisation and biodiversity conservation and minimise potential environmental and community impacts". It is important that the community is protected.