Huntlee New Town - Stage 2

Hello,
I'm proposing this project on the following, however if these items were to be addressed, I would support the project,
1. Insufficient wildlife corridors
2. Lack of barrier zones for existing Hanwood residents on the east side of Hanwood Road
3. Lack of open spaces
4. Requires a greater environmental study on the impact of wildlife in the area
5. Requires full environmental stud of threaten trees
6. lack of information on water supply, impacting on flow rates
7. No information on building buffer protection for Contruction phase for existing residence

Huntlee Stage 2 - Objections

I am a resident who has lived in an existing street of North Rothbury NSW 2335 for 11 years, prior to ANY development of Huntlee taking place.

Objection #1. In relation to the Traffic and Transport Impact Assessment (Document M - Traffic Impact Assessment) as well as the Intersection Concept Designs (Document J7 - Intersection Concept Designs).

I object to the proposed intersection upgrade seen in drawing WCD-C04.41 (Document J7 - Intersection Concept Designs).

Transport Impact Assessment (Document M - Traffic Impact Assessment), as well as the Intersection Concept Designs (Document J7 - Intersection Concept Designs) documents have not taken into consideration the written complaints made to Transport for NSW by the residents and road users in relation to the ‘left in and left out’ intersection at the intersection of Kesterton Rise and Wine Country Drive.
This intersection is well known by the residents to have a high frequency of motorists exiting Kesterton Rise left onto Wine Country Drive and then immediately performing an illegal U-turn over double lines, to gain quicker access to the interchange of the Hunter Expressway.
I personally have made 2 complaints to Transport for NSW to allow TfNSW to be aware of these illegal U-turns and the risk it poses to the community, and many other friends and residents of the area have told me that they have done so also. This is not a driver behavior issue, as it’s more simply put that Huntlee designed a half working intersection that has enabled drivers to make illegal u turns. Had the intersection been built as a fully working intersection to start with, the problem would not exist.
This intersection is flawed and is not properly designed to prevent illegal U-turns on Wine Country Drive.
The subject of illegal U-turns is frequently discussed on the Facebook Page Group known as ‘Real Huntlee’. I suggest that representatives of the NSW Government (as well as Huntlee representatives) access this Facebook Page to see the community’s constant debate and highlight of risk of this subject.
Referencing drawing WCD-C04.41 (Document J7 - Intersection Concept Designs), this style of left in and left out intersection seen at the intersection of Kesterton Rise and Wine Country Drive is earmarked to be repeated between the intersections of Thomas Street and Mitchell Streets (the old existing roads of North Rothbury) for the Stage 2 Huntlee residents to use for access to Wine Country Drive.
The planned intersection design I found in drawing number WCD-C09.41 is a near exact repeat of the high-risk intersection at Kesterton Rise and Wine Country Drive where road users are frequently observed performing illegal U-turns.
The risk to this proposed design in drawing WCD-C09.41 is that the road users exiting left onto Wine Country Drive in a northbound direction of travel from the new proposed unnamed road of Huntlee, will in turn lead to a high frequency of road users performing illegal U-turns at the intersection of Wine Country Drive and Thomas street in order to turn around and head in a southbound direction towards cessnock. Therefor the intersection of Wine Country Drive and Thomas Street will be required to be upgraded to prevent illegal U-Turns. There will also be users leaving the Huntlee Stage 2 proposed street seen in drawing WCD-C09.41 and performing an illegal right-hand U-turn to gain access to a Southbound direction of travel on Wine Country Drive to head towards the Cessnock direction.
This current proposed intersection will create new risks and future accidents and injuries to other road users and pedestrians, and I am suggesting that the intersection be removed and rejected from the Huntlee Stage 2 proposal based on the already known complaints of illegal U-turns that have been made to Transport for NSW at the intersection Kesterton Rise and Wine Country Drive.
Instead, the Huntlee Stage 2 residents should drive to the traffic light intersection at Wine Country Drive and Triton Boulevard to reduce the risk to padestrians and road users near Mitchell and Thomas Streets intersections of Wine Country Drive.

Its appears to be very cheap and inept of Huntlee (LWP PROPERTY GROUP PTY LTD) to not have already taken this into consideration at the initial planning stages before going to the NSW Government for planning approval


Objection #2. In relation to the Intersection Concept Designs (Document J7 - Intersection Concept Designs).
I reference drawings WCD-C04.52 and WCD-C04.53
I object to the proposed traffic light design in drawings WCD-C04.52 and WCD-C04.53
The proposed traffic light intersection will remove the existing resident’s ability to turn right from Mayne and Reed Streets at the intersections of Wine Country Drive, as well as the road user’s ability to turn right off Wine Country Drive into Mayne and Reed Street when they are traveling to North Rothbury from Cessnock.
I suggest that allowance be made at the Reed Street intersection at Wine Country Drive to allow road users to turn right into Reed Street off Wine Country Drive when they are traveling to North Rothbury from Cessnock, as well as adding the ability to turn right out of Reed Street onto Wine Country Drive.
If the proposed intersections are completed as displayed in the drawings WCD-C04.52 and WCD-C04.53 it will lead to an increase of road users from Reed Street and Mayne Steet needing to travel east along Mayne Street and onto Scott Street and in turn onto Rothbury Street to turn right onto Wine County Drive at the intersection of Rothbury Street and Wine Country Drive.
With this now foreseen increase of traffic activity at the intersection of Rothbury Street, Scott Street, and Mayne Street; the roads of Mayne Street, Scott Street and Rothbury Street, as well as the intersection of Wine Country Drive and Rothbury Street, the intersections of Michell Street and Wine Country Drive, and the intersection of Thomas Street and Wine Country Drive will also need to be upgraded to modern standards to allow for safe access of road users and pedestrians at these intersections due to the redirected traffic proposed by Huntlee Stage 2 proposal.

Its appears to be very cheap and inept of Huntlee (LWP PROPERTY GROUP PTY LTD) to not have already taken this into consideration at the initial planning stages before going to the NSW Government for planning approval.


Objection #3. I object to the Huntlee Stage 2 proposal as there is no updated provision for pedestrians on Wine Country Drive between the proposed traffic light intersection seen in drawings WCD-C04.52 and WCD-C04.53 and the intersection of Wine Country Drive and Tritton Boulevard traffic light intersection.
Due to the addition of 1000s of homes, road users, pedestrians and residents that are proposed by Huntlee Stage 2 designs, this leads to a higher amount of traffic and pedestrian activity along the state-owned road of Wine Country Drive.
Huntlee Stage 2 designs should not be approved until there is a provision/addition of a pedestrian crossing or refuge island on Wine Country Drive just south of the intersection of Rothbury Streets, to allow for pedestrians (young or vulnerable) to cross the roadway safety on both the western and eastern sides of Wine Country Drive houses.
The reason being is that I foresee I higher number of pedestrians around the streets of Rothbury and Mitchel Streets at the Wine Country Drive area trying to cross the roadway of Wine Country Drive.
Also, my above-mentioned Objection #2 indicates that existing road users of Mayne and Reed Streets will lose their ability to turn right from these streets onto Wine Country Drive, and will instead have to use either Rothbury Street, Mitchell Street or Thomas Street to turn right onto Wine Country Drive. This will further exacerbate the traffic around Rothbury Street, Mitchell Street or Thomas Street which will then in turn cause greater risk to pedestrians crossing Wine Country Drive at or around Rothbury Street, Mitchell Street or Thomas Street.

Its appears to be very cheap and inept of Huntlee (LWP PROPERTY GROUP PTY LTD) to not have already taken this into consideration at the initial planning stages before going to the NSW Government for planning approval

need more houses

I object to the project encroaching so close to Hanwood Estate, as I believe there needs to be a buffer of at least 500 meters to divide the 2 estates.
Firstly to allow for wildlife to have some chance of surviving the lost of vegetation, as well as providing a wildlife corridor.
Secondly, as Huntlee is a very different estate (small land lots) to Hanwood Estate (woodland acreage) therefore Huntlee will devalue the Hanwood estate allowing home owner to lose thousands of dollars of their current land value.

We are raising 5 objections to the project. We hare suggested solutions to resolve our concerns.
See pdf attachment.

Nadine and Jean Brochut

The approach to separating the land from the new development is not environmentally friendly and subjects current residents to dangers in relation to flooding, erosion and bush fires, hinders residents in terms of views from their properties in which they bought with the intention of being surrounded by the nature reserve. The safety of current residents will also be at risk as the properties are extremely close and will have no proper separation in terms of security.
Currently, there is a worry that the construction of the new development is having negative impacts on the structural integrity of existing residents dwellings.
If the decision is to separate the current and proposed residencies by a barrier of dirt, when vegetation grows, there is a risk of vegetation blocking solar panels and natural sunlight on existing properties and vegetation falling and damaging property of current residencies.

Addendum to my previous submission

1. Causeway at 778 Old North road
The Old North road causeway at 778 Old North road needs to be fixed permanently as part of the road sealing project to enable a safe access to the Large lots development entrance.
This means there is a need of infrastructures to manage stormwater coming from the bush toward Old North Road.

2. Pressure on wildlife
After the development of Huntlee villages and Aria lots, the development of the new large lots at Old North road will reduce even further the natural landscape available for wildlife such as kangaroos and birds. These animals will therefore move more frequently to the neighbouring properties increasing the damages on productive vineyards and orchards.
Under more pressure, the wildlife will also increase damages on fences requiring higher maintenance works.

The area where the large lots development at Old North road is planned should be included in the conservation area to create a consistent block of undisrupted natural landscape.

3. Biosecurity requirement

The proximity of the large lots development with Old north road vineyard and orchards increases the risk of biosecurity hazards.

Lethal viruses and fungi can be imported in the area by the increased population around the vineyards and orchards. This represents a very high risk for the health and eventually the survival of the productive vineyard and olive trees.

The area where the large lots development at Old North road is planned should be included in the conservation area to create a consistent block of undisrupted natural landscape and an efficient biosecurity barrier with the vineyard and orchards.

I am against this new development, due to the following reasons. Lack of wildlife corridors indicated on plan. Lack of indicated buffer zones for existing Hanwood residents, especially on hanwood Rd. Habitat conservation corridors and riparian areas relating to existing provenance vegetation and endangered species of birds, using the area for migration. An additional environmental report needs to be more current, with identification of areas with threatened species of trees, shrubs and persoonia and animals. Lack of open spaces. We have seen spotted quolls in our area, as evidenced by our neighbour, who no longer lives in the area. Emails supporting this were sent to Ashley [email protected] on Wednesday 5 February 2020.

Lack of wild life corridors
Lack of buffer zones for Hanwood Rd residents
An additional environmental report needs to be more current identifying endangered trees shrubs and animals
Lack of open spaces

The reasons why, include. Lack of wildlife corridors indicated on plan. Lack of indicated buffer zones for existing hanwood residents, especially on hanwood road. Habitat conservation corridors and riparian areas relating to existing provenance vegetation and endangered species of birds, using the area for migration. An additional environmental report needs to be more current, with identification of areas with threatened species of trees, shrubs and persoonia and animals. Lack of open spaces.

To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development in North Rothbury, NSW, due to the significant environmental and community impacts it presents. The proposed development threatens the survival of several endangered species, including the North Rothbury Persoonia (Persoonia pauciflora) and various endangered bird species, while also lacking adequate wildlife corridors. Furthermore, the development poses substantial negative consequences for the local residents.
Reasons for Objection
1. Endangered North Rothbury Persoonia: The North Rothbury Persoonia is an endangered plant species that is endemic to the North Rothbury area. Its limited distribution makes it highly vulnerable to habitat loss, and the proposed development site is a crucial habitat for this species. The destruction of its habitat would have irreversible effects, jeopardizing the survival of the species.
2. Threats to Endangered Bird Species: The area in and around North Rothbury is home to several endangered bird species, including the Regent Honeyeater (Anthochaera phrygia), Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor), and the Black-chinned Honeyeater (Melithreptus gularis). These species depend on the native woodland habitat for feeding, nesting, and breeding. The proposed development would result in the destruction of vital habitats, leading to further declines in these already critically endangered bird populations.
3. Lack of Wildlife Corridors: The proposed development plan fails to include adequate wildlife corridors that are essential for the movement and survival of native fauna. Wildlife corridors are crucial for maintaining ecological connectivity, allowing species to migrate, find food, and breed. Without these corridors, the development would isolate populations of native species, increasing the risk of local extinctions and reducing biodiversity. This fragmentation of habitats would have long-term ecological consequences that extend beyond the immediate area of development.
4. Impact on Local Residents: The development also raises significant concerns for local residents. Increased traffic, noise pollution, and the destruction of natural landscapes will diminish the quality of life for those who live in the area. The loss of green spaces and the alteration of the local environment could lead to a decrease in property values and a sense of community displacement. Residents have expressed concerns about the strain on local infrastructure, including roads, schools, and healthcare services, which are not equipped to handle the expected increase in population density.
5. Inadequate Environmental Impact Assessment: I am concerned that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) conducted for this development does not adequately address the cumulative impact on the endangered plant and bird species, the lack of wildlife corridors, and the broader environmental consequences. A more comprehensive and independent EIA is necessary to fully understand the potential impacts and to explore alternative solutions that could minimize harm.
Conclusion
In light of the critical importance of preserving the endangered North Rothbury Persoonia, protecting endangered bird species, ensuring the inclusion of wildlife corridors, and addressing the concerns of local residents, I strongly urge the Council to reject the proposed development in North Rothbury. The area’s ecological and community values are too significant to be compromised.
I respectfully request that the council considers alternative locations for the development that do not threaten endangered species or local habitats. Additionally, any development plan should incorporate comprehensive measures to protect and preserve wildlife corridors and address the concerns of local residents.
Thank you for considering my submission. I trust that the council will take the necessary steps to protect this unique environment and the well-being of the North Rothbury community.

We moved to Hanwood estate 8yrs ago...before huntlee really existed.
We have been led to believe our rural property estate would be free of the residential concrete jungle of huntlee. Being told our estate would be surrounded by a wallof bushland...only to be advised now yrs on that houses will butt up against my neighbours acreages... which means no freedom from hustle and bustle which is why we moved here. And as a requirement in our estate, natural fencing only...so no more privacy...or safety of our land and belongings as access is open to all properties backing on the new huntlee being built.
We are told house will be built in bushland along handwood road, where over the years have witnessed 3 echidna make there trek during mating season between the coles side of our road to the opposite. Only 2 months ago in the same bushland I witnessed a medium sized wombat cross in the evening... where will these Australian animals end up...if all the bush is bulldozed... not to mention the hundreds of kangaroos being pushed towards our road...as there once fruitful land is now concrete houses,roads and landless....
Not to mention the North rothbury pisonia which was part of our questions when building on our land... why does this not exist for the huntlee estate...so saving our endangered fauna and scarce flora aussie,animals only matter to us little ppl, but big corporations can bulldoze 100s if not 1000s of our bushland...effecting allow the above.
Neighbours have even spotting platypus in black Creek... what will come of them when 100s and 1000s flock to the creek with there pollution and uneducated actions...
When is enough , enough... huntlee is big enough. Save our rural aspect.... the reason why 100s of us moved here ... go make the big smoke more big and shitty...

Hello, I am resident of Branxton. Reading the proposal, I am not clear how the train station will be improved and the train service to Newcastle/Sydney will updated to handle the additional people/traffic from the new development.
- I would like the roads to/from the station improved as they have suffered during the sustained rain we have had for the past few years.
- I would like the see the station platforms extended so they can accommodate the longer express trains that stop in Singleton
- I would like to see some investment into the Branxton town centre to accommodate the influx of new people. I know this is part of the future planning, but private investment would help to kickstart things.
- I don't personally love the KFC on the corner, but understand and accept its part of the package which I do support.
Cheers, Ed Kopkas

To whom it may concern,
I am a resident of over eight years on Hanwood Road Branxton.
I have growing family or 4 and we absolutely adore our little castle. 
Our reason for buying into Hanwood Estate was due to its proximity to our local flora and fauna. I can not imagine a better place for my wife and I to raise our 2 beautiful children. 
My main concern is as follows. After looking at the proposed plans I believe a larger area between the rear of our north and eastern borders and Huntlee needs to be strongly considered. This area should be planted with all native flora to help make up for what is being removed. A larger area would also act as a fire break for residents. This area would also be used as a corridor for our native wildlife. This larger border could also incorporate and natural windrow that will add the benefit of noise mitigation and fire prevention. We have existing waterways that run through our property and I would like to see minimal disruption occurring to these.  
I truly hope that you take my proposal seriously. 
Please don’t hesitate to contact me for more information. 
Scott Farrand 
0414782140 
[email protected]

Details of my objection are included in the attached letter. I have also attached a copy of a recent BIONET Threatened Species List for the Huntlee Concept area 2.

The reason I am objecting to the Huntlee Stage 2 proposal is on the grounds of the environmental impact this will have on this area. I have only lived here for approximately 15 months, but in that time I & many neighbours have had the pleasure is observing wildlife in their natural habitat. Often you have to stop your car to let an echidna or turtle cross the road & there have been many sightings of wallabies/kangaroos. I personally had the pleasure of seeing a wombat make his way carefully from one side to the other & I feel all these native creatures will be negatively impacted if this proposal is allowed to proceed.

To Whom It May Concern,

I have recently built a small modular home on the back of my daughter's property to enjoy my later years.
The peace, quiet, and abundant wildlife here have greatly contributed to my health and well-being. It’s truly an ideal place to live.
After reviewing the proposed plans, I strongly believe that a larger buffer zone between the rear boundary and Huntlee should be considered. This area serves as a vital corridor for native wildlife, which I observe daily.
Expanding this buffer would also provide additional noise mitigation.
Furthermore, there are existing waterways running through the property, where I have personally witnessed platypuses, water dragons, turtles, and native fish, especially during rain. I’m concerned that stormwater runoff from residential properties will introduce pollutants such as car wash residues and fertilizers, harming these fragile ecosystems.
I hope my concerns are taken into consideration.

Sincerely,
Sandra Mcgregor
202a Hanwood Road Branxton 2335

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding the proposed Stage 2 Huntlee development, particularly its proximity to pre-existing rural and residential properties. The scale and location of this project present substantial challenges that require thorough consideration before moving forward.

**Proximity to Existing Properties:**
The current development plan places this large-scale project uncomfortably close to established rural and residential properties. This proximity poses a serious risk to the peaceful and serene environment long cherished by residents. The addition of 5,000 new housing lots will drastically alter the area’s character, with increased noise and activity severely diminishing the quality of life for existing residents.

**Noise Pollution:**
The area already experiences considerable noise pollution from the Hunter Expressway and the coal train line. The introduction of 5,000 more housing lots will undoubtedly exacerbate this issue, leading to further disruptions. Increased traffic, ongoing construction, and the general activity of a densely populated area will erode the tranquility that local residents currently enjoy, significantly impacting their well-being.

**Coal Dust and Air Quality:**
The nearby coal train line already contributes to coal dust pollution, posing health risks to residents. Expanding the area with additional housing and infrastructure will likely increase air pollution, both during construction and in the long term due to heightened traffic. This decline in air quality raises concerns over respiratory and other health-related issues. The health and safety of the current community must be prioritized over the rush to develop.

**Wildlife and Habitat Loss:**
The proposed development site is home to a diverse range of wildlife, including endangered and vulnerable species. Animals such as Platypuses, Squirrel gliders, Possums, Spotted quolls, Wombats, Kangaroos, Wallabies, Hunter River and Eastern long neck Turtles, Lizards, Snakes, Powerful owls and countless native birds rely on this habitat for their survival. The destruction of their natural habitat would not only lead to a significant loss of biodiversity but could also result in the displacement and potential extinction of these species in the region. The long-term ecological impact of such a development cannot be overstated.

**Recommendations for Mitigation:**
I urge the developers to revisit their plans, implementing more substantial buffers between the new development and existing properties to preserve the current rural atmosphere. Furthermore, I strongly recommend allowing months, if not years, for the controlled draining of dams and wetlands before any construction begins, giving wildlife the opportunity to relocate naturally. As a wildlife carer and rehabilitator with over 10 years of experience, I have witnessed similar mistakes in the development of Katherine's Landing at Huntlee Estate and ARIA Estate, resulting in preventable harm to local species. These errors should not be repeated.

In conclusion, I request that the development plan be reconsidered, with a focus on protecting the environmental and community integrity of the area. Any expansion must be approached with sustainability and respect for both the existing residents and the natural ecosystem.

Thank you for your consideration of these critical issues.

Cat Farrand
202 Hanwood Road Branxton 2335
[email protected]
0414805499
(Licenced Wildlife Carer for Hunter Wildlife Rescue)

Hanwood Road has an abundance of wildlife which has not been taken into consideration with the proposal. There will no buffer zones or wildlife corridors.

This email is made in reference to the State Significant Development currently on public exhibition on the NSW Planning Portal, application number SSD707483466. I strongly object to the proposal as it currently stands, in particular the developments close proximity to the existing residential area of Hanwood Estate.

There are extensive issues with the proposal in it’s current form, which are including but not limited to

- Inadequate wildlife corridors
- The absence of buffer zones for Hanwood Estate residents, who purchased these properties with the specific intention of uninterrupted bushland in the surrounding area
- Dramatic, intentional and unconsidered changes to the way of life for the residents of Hanwood Estate
- Lack of sufficient Habitat Conservation corridors and riparian areas relating to existing provenance vegetation and endangered species of birds who use the area for migration.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the State Government has set strong targets for the Local Government Areas across NSW, the irreversible damage that this will cause to the way of life for the residents of the area must be given greater consideration.