Martins Creek Quarry Project

Dear Sir/ Madam

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion for the following reasons:
We live in a peaceful residential area. There is already a fair amount of traffic noise on the main road where we live but at the moment it is fairly busy during the day and peaceful at night. If the mine goes ahead with its plans it will increase traffic exponentially. This will not only have a detrimental effect on noise pollution but also air quality and significant road degradation. Trucks cause pot holes, which of cause us tax payers have to foot the bill for. They also on smaller roads, such as the one we live on, cause congestion. The roads are busy enough during rush hour without an extra 80 trucks careening down them. They will also be a danger at school times when hundreds of children are dropped off and will cause havoc on the main road. I have already had a truck driver nearly crash into the back of me on Belmore road as a child was on the zebra crossing, he did not see me slow down or the child in the middle of the road and only just stopped in time to a huge squeel of brakes. We want to continue to live in a peaceful and beautiful area but with constant noise, increased pollution and traffic the area will no longer be an attractive and beautiful place to live. We put a lot of time and effort on our lovely home and do not want to see it destroyed or degraded by an unnecessary and environmentally destructive endeavour.

Apart from the negative effect it will have on all the residents on the prospective truck route, it will also have a huge impact on the environment where the mine will dig. Local wildlife will be disturbed by loss of habitat, 6 threatened species will be removed and a huge amount of native vegetation will be destroyed. This is not just destructive, is is plain wrong, it should not be allowed and I hope the right decision will be taken to stop the mine and this project.
I have not made a reportable political donation.

I oppose the Martins Creek quarry expansion as it will greatly reduce the rural ambience of all areas on the truck route. I accept that I live near Brandy Hill quarry and have to listen to those trucks 6 days a week. But to increase the truck movements to over 80 an hour is ridiculous. Listening to semi-trailers and their like with dodgy exhaust systems is not why I left the city. I also feel it will be very hard to get out onto Brandy Hill Drive. I only have a view of 30-40 metres over the rise. If there is a constant flow of semi-trailers travelling over the speed limit of 80 kmh (which many already do on a regular basis) I fear for my safety and that of many neighbours.

Please find submission in attached file.

Please support our homes, families and communities by saying NO to this development. Attached is a letter addressing my concerns. Thankyou.

21 November 2016
To the Dept. of Planning and Environment

RE: Martins Creek Quarry Extension Project (SSD 6612)

This submission is made in opposition to the proposed Martins Creek Quarry Expansion for the following reasons.

1. The proposal will significantly increase heavy vehicle numbers through local streets including the streets of Paterson, Tocal, Bolwarra Heights, Bolwarra, Lorn, and Maitland. The significant increase in heavy vehicle numbers will result in the following.
a. Reduced road safety to all road users as a direct result of an increased proportion of heavy vehicles. This will lead to more frequent and more severe road crashes in growing and more densely populated residential areas.
b. Reduced road safety for cyclists, with limited on road (shoulder) provision and no off road provision for most of the road network that will be utilised by the quarry vehicles.
c. Given the lack of footpaths, many school children, their parents and pedestrians in general, many of whom have prams, also walk along these same road shoulders. With the increased number of heavy vehicles, the likelihood of a fatal collision with a pedestrian or child is increased.
d. The significant increase in heavy vehicles will lead to the growing problem of road damage. This will further compound the above road safety concerns.
e. The traffic impact assessment prepared by SECAsolution does not adequately identify and address all safety concerns or the significant increase in traffic. Nor are these safety concerns adequately addressed in the submission. For example, the report acknowledges that road carriage way width is an issue on Tocal Road at Bolwarra Heights, however then goes on to state that widening is not possible so the proposal is ok. This is not an acceptable response to the significant issue of road safety.
f. To adequately address road safety issues, an independent road safety audit should be conducted on the existing local road networks that will be impacted by the significant increase in heavy vehicles.
2. The proposal will significantly increase heavy vehicle numbers through local streets including the streets of Paterson, Tocal, Bolwarra Heights, Bolwarra, Lorn, and Maitland. The significant increase in heavy vehicle numbers will result in a significant increase in road traffic noise. In this regards the proposed hours of operation are not acceptable. It is also advised that the proponents justification for the increase in operation (trucking) hours are not justified when deliveries could be made the day prior for example to batch plants, rather than the morning of. All sites need to operate under conditions of approval for when works can commence on site, the justification provided by the proponent is not justified when better planning of materials management should be undertaken.
3. The noise report assumes a less than 1 dBA increase in road traffic noise. Given the proposed early hours of operation, the noise report does not adequately address the proposed significant increase in heavy vehicle movements in early morning hours that will have a significantly greater impact.
4. The validity of the acoustic report prepared by RCA Acoustics is questionable when the author, reviewer and approver are the same person.
5. The submission for the mine expansion and increased output of quarry materials heavily relies on the needs of a number of road projects that have either commenced, are nearing completion, or do not have construction funding. In this regards the increase in need and output from the quarry is not justified.
6. The facility has been known to constantly breach license and conditions of approval. It is questionable as to why an organisation who willingly breaches license and conditions of approval should then be given the opportunity to have their operating conditions relaxed.

21 November 2016
To the Dept. of Planning and Environment

RE: Martins Creek Quarry Extension Project (SSD 6612)

This submission is made in opposition to the proposed Martins Creek Quarry Expansion for the following reasons.

1. The proposal will significantly increase heavy vehicle numbers through local streets including the streets of Paterson, Tocal, Bolwarra Heights, Bolwarra, Lorn, and Maitland. The significant increase in heavy vehicle numbers will result in the following.
a. Reduced road safety to all road users as a direct result of an increased proportion of heavy vehicles. This will lead to more frequent and more severe road crashes in growing and more densely populated residential areas.
b. Reduced road safety for cyclists, with limited on road (shoulder) provision and no off road provision for most of the road network that will be utilised by the quarry vehicles.
c. Given the lack of footpaths, many school children, their parents and pedestrians in general, many of whom have prams, also walk along these same road shoulders. With the increased number of heavy vehicles, the likelihood of a fatal collision with a pedestrian or child is increased.
d. The significant increase in heavy vehicles will lead to the growing problem of road damage. This will further compound the above road safety concerns.
e. The traffic impact assessment prepared by SECAsolution does not adequately identify and address all safety concerns or the significant increase in traffic. Nor are these safety concerns adequately addressed in the submission. For example, the report acknowledges that road carriage way width is an issue on Tocal Road at Bolwarra Heights, however then goes on to state that widening is not possible so the proposal is ok. This is not an acceptable response to the significant issue of road safety.
f. To adequately address road safety issues, an independent road safety audit should be conducted on the existing local road networks that will be impacted by the significant increase in heavy vehicles.
2. The proposal will significantly increase heavy vehicle numbers through local streets including the streets of Paterson, Tocal, Bolwarra Heights, Bolwarra, Lorn, and Maitland. The significant increase in heavy vehicle numbers will result in a significant increase in road traffic noise. In this regards the proposed hours of operation are not acceptable. It is also advised that the proponents justification for the increase in operation (trucking) hours are not justified when deliveries could be made the day prior for example to batch plants, rather than the morning of. All sites need to operate under conditions of approval for when works can commence on site, the justification provided by the proponent is not justified when better planning of materials management should be undertaken.
3. The noise report assumes a less than 1 dBA increase in road traffic noise. Given the proposed early hours of operation, the noise report does not adequately address the proposed significant increase in heavy vehicle movements in early morning hours that will have a significantly greater impact.
4. The validity of the acoustic report prepared by RCA Acoustics is questionable when the author, reviewer and approver are the same person.
5. The submission for the mine expansion and increased output of quarry materials heavily relies on the needs of a number of road projects that have either commenced, are nearing completion, or do not have construction funding. In this regards the increase in need and output from the quarry is not justified.
6. The facility has been known to constantly breach license and conditions of approval. It is questionable as to why an organisation who willingly breaches license and conditions of approval should then be given the opportunity to have their operating conditions relaxed.

21 November 2016
NSW Department of Planning.
Attention: Thomas Watt
Re: Martins Creek Quarry SSD EIS Submission
I have lived in Paterson for nearly 30 years, raising a family and have supported the local community through membership of service clubs and The Paterson Progress Association. I live on a small acreage zoned as Rural Lifestyle amongst many other such properties.
The two Daracon Community Consultation Meetings that I have attended as part of the EIS process were a farce and the community members in attendance were lectured to by Daracon as if what they were proposing was a foregone conclusion. At no time during the meetings were Daracon prepared to engage with those present to answer any questions that were put to them. Most questions concerned the impacts on the community's amenity. So that "Consultation Process" produced no answers from Daracon.
Daracon impact on my daily life by operating beyond their current Dungog Council consent conditions. I drive my wife to and from Paterson Station nearly every day and find that the truck and dog traffic originating from the quarry is incompatible with the road infrastructure. I have encountered delays and near misses on many occasions and to top it off I have given up having my usual alfresco coffee due to the noise and proximity of the passing trucks not to mention their belching diesel fumes have also destroyed the ambience. I am sure my change of habit is magnified by many others and is having a detrimental impact on the local business houses.
Given the historical heritage of our town it is sheer lunacy to put the traffic levels of heavy vehicles that Daracon proposes through our town. We had a taste of it in 2014 and now they wish to increase, formalise and validate in this application.
I feel the community is being asked to pay a heavy price for Daracon's commercial success. In my view they should look for another site or use the rail. There are mountains of hard rock along the upgraded Pacific highway north of Raymond Terrace where haulage issues would have no impacts on lineal developed communities.
I strongly urge you to reject this application and protect the community's amenity.

P.S. Economic Importance: Cutting through all the consultants rhetoric if Martins Creek Quarry closed tomorrow there would be nil impact on the supply availability of hard rock aggregate.

William Gray
33 Glenburn Road
Paterson NSW2421
21 November 2016

I am opposed to the submission and have attached a supporting statement.

My family lives in Paterson & we visit the town regularly & have always loved bringing our daughter 'home' to the country. But in recent times, the blasting & truck noise has really negatively impacted our visits. We come to Paterson for peace & quiet, & yet in some ways it is noisier than in the middle of the Sydney CBD. I can't walk with my daughter in to town, as it's too dangerous with the trucks constantly flying past. It's not safe to go for a run or a bike ride, because of the speed & quantity of trucks passing. The roads are in a terrible condition, because they already struggle to cope with the density of the heavy vehicle traffic. And this is a small country community!

While our enjoyment of our visits are affected, I also worry about my family who live in Paterson & the stress & anxiety this causes them. As well as the impact of the constant 5:30AM 'alarm clock' that the trucks have become. The current quantity is over the top, I can't believe an expansion is being considered. This is an important issue & it's time for the government to support the wishes of the community, its constituents, & put an end to the current breaches & definitely the expansion application.

I wish to lodge my objection the expansion plans of Daracon at the Martin's Creek Quarry.
I believe that the current road infrastructure will be unable to cope with the massive increase as proposed in the EIS.
As a regular motorist into Paterson, I have noticed several near misses relating to trucks cutting the corner outside the GPO. This corner is quite sharp and leaves little margin for error. Furthermore, the camber is not suited to the constant battering of laden trucks and will no doubt deteriorate seriously and quickly if the proposed truck movements of 40 laden per hour comes to fruition. The pressure would be further exacerbated if 3-4 were in convoy, an unavoidable scenario given the number of times the rail crossing closes down the thoroughfare for lengthy periods of time (many of the goods trains are 60-80 carriages long).
This convoy scenario would also impinge on people trying to cross the road to and from the butchers and grocers. The street is narrow as it is and when trucks are side by side travelling north and south there is no room to swing a cat let alone open your car door.
The small dog leg where Station St meets the main drag is also a current danger point that would become much, much worse with the suggested increase in movements.
My third main area of concern is the bridge on Paterson Rd and junction of Tocal Rd. An event that recently happened to myself (and must happen to many more) could have been disastrous. I was on the edge of the bridge turning right towards Paterson when a truck and dog approached from Paterson, wanting to turn onto the bridge. It was closely followed by another truck and dog, obscuring the view of the straight through lane. My only option was to edge forward to see if the coast was clear or rely on the truckie to signal that it was clear as it is impossible for the truck to access the bridge as well. In this case another truck and dog came hurtling through (100kmp at this section) heading to towards Maitland. Fortunately, a horrific accident was avoided. This scenario would become far too regular if the truck movements increased with the accordance to the expansion of the submitted EIS.
My next point is that Paterson is a historic village and to some extent relates to its heritage of being quiet and peaceful, a place of rest. John Tucker Park is always packed on a weekend for this reason, picnickers enjoying the country side and the peace associated with it. It won't take long for this to diminish with the constant rumble of trucks if the Saturday haulage is approved.
The amenity of the village is at high risk not just for weekenders but day in day out for the people who have chose the village and surrounds as their home.
A well known saying is 'Home is where the Heart is.' Paterson is our heart. 80 trucks per hour starting at 5:30am to 7pm six days a week is an impending heart attack. An attack on the people of people of Paterson.
Do we have a choice? No!! It is the only route that the trucks can take.
Does the Department of Planning have a choice. Yes! Limit the trucks to a rate that won't clog the artery and kill the village. Keep the starting time at a reasonable hour and reject the extra day of haulage.
The current DA satisfies the heart whereas the expansion can only lead to a quick death.
No, I don't want the quarry closed down.
But I certainly want the expansion in the EIS rejected.

The original approval for this quarry was granted to allow extraction of 300,000,000 tonnes of product to be exported from the quarry by rail. There is a rail spur into the quarry which is now not used, the argument used is that it is not economic.
The approval was increased to allow the export of 500m tonnes.
The company has been exporting in excess of 1m tonnes per year by road through the historic village of Paterson. The vibration caused by the passage of these trucks through the village will destroy the historic buildings both brick and timber and noise is destroying the ambiance of this once peaceful village.
I have no objection to the export of material from this quarry and do not object to the requested increase in tonnage PROVIDED that the product is exported by rail.
It is stated that to use rail is uneconomic as it involves multi handling.
As in other countries the product can be loaded onto trucks an trailers which are then loaded onto flat bed rail cars for distribution from the destination rail head. If the product is to be sent by ship then rail cars such as those used for coal can be used.
It is time that we as a nation reduced road traffic in favour of rail.
In Conclusion I Register my objection to the proposal as submitted for the increase in tonnage to be exported from this quarry by road.

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry expansion because I do not want to see more trucks on Brandy Hill Drive. We live directly off Brandy Hill Drive. We are one house away from Brandy Hill Drive and we will be directly affected by noise, dust and traffic congestion. Our son is on his P's and our daughter is about to start to learn to drive and it is dangerous turning out onto Brandy Hill Drive already when trucks are coming at you at 80km/hour. The truck movements that the Martins Creek Quarry expansion are talking about would make it difficult to even get out of our street. I am also very concerned about the drop in property values in our area because of the trucks. They will also damage the road and we get more broken windscreens driving on Brandy Hill Drive.

I write to oppose the huge expansion of Daracon's Martins Creek quarry. I live in Bolwarra Heights and I am concerned for Maitland area residents, particularly those who live in Lorn, Bolwarra and Paterson.
My concerns include:
The scale of the project: The company is seeking to extract 1.5 million tonnes of hard rock material a year. This means the destruction of 37 hectares of natural bushland and the possible loss of koala habitat along with destruction of Aboriginal sites. Blasting at the quarry is already a problem for nearby residents and expansion will only make it worse. There has already been evidence of residents' houses being damaged through vibrations from blasting.
Noise and road haulage: The plan to have an extra 400 truck movements a day is a horrendous scenario. Already, residents have complained about the noise on their streets from empty trucks in the morning and throughout the day. This is a destruction of social amenity on a grand scale and ignores the elderly and shift-workers. The roads in Maitland are already suffering from congestion and an extra 400 truck movements would lead to road chaos.
Road works: The conjunction of Tocal Road and Paterson Road in Bolwarra Heights will need a huge amount of work to cope with extra traffic, as more trucks will be coming from the Brandy Hill quarry. Also, the roundabout at Paterson Road and Flat Road will be under pressure from extra traffic leading to delays and possibly more accidents and road rage. The intersection at Melbourne Street, East Maitland, from the river crossing is also a major concern. This intersection is also congested most of the day and will be a further nightmare for car users. And what about the excessive traffic movements. Melbourne Street, East Maitland, is already at breaking point at peak hours but once more trucks are added to the flow this will mean more delays, more congestion, more frustrated drivers and the likely increase of incidents of accidents and roads rage.

Air Quality and safety: Diesel emissions are a carcinogen and affect people's health. Residents are concerned about air pollution impacts, particularly on the health of children and whether this contributes to asthma conditions. Extra truck movements near schools are also a concern to families.

Lifestyle and property: The quarry operation is destroying people's lifestyle and impacting property prices.

Social amenity: The company also wants to increase the hours of operation. Quarrying will be from 6am to 6pm (Monday to Saturday); processing from 6am to 10pm (Monday to Saturday); mixing and binding from 4.30am to 10pm (Monday to Saturday); stockpiling, loading and dispatch of road transport from 5.30am to 7pm (Monday to Saturday). This is a disruption to the lives of many people from Paterson through to Newcastle.
There will be 40 loads per hour dispatched during morning peaks (equating to 80 truck movements per hour taking into account empty trucks travelling to the site), There will be 215 loads per day (equating to 430 truck movements per day taking into account empty truck movements to the site).
This means a loss of social amenity to hundreds, if not thousands, of residents along the route, especially in the narrow, winding streets of Paterson, the narrow parts of Tocal Road, Bolwarra Heights, and excessive noise and speed through much of Maitland.
Rail: Why is the rail line not considered suitable for this project? I am informed that it would need to be upgraded but surely this would be a better solution for all concerned.
Employment: Yes it is obvious there will be extra jobs involved in the expansion. But most will be short term. There will be benefits for a few at the expensive of hurting the vast majority.

Community: The communities from Paterson through to Maitland have no trust in Daracon or that it will do anything positive for the community. Reasons:

* Daracon has not put in place any interim measures while taking a long time to prepare the EIS, while the community has a deadline for submissions.
* Daracon has not resolved any key concerns of the community despite consultation.
* Public consultation has been applied as a `tick the box' process;
* It may be OK to do business and make profits, but not on the back of community impacts.
* Daracon, I am informed, has breached its conditions of operation many times in the past. So, who will monitor any new regulations?
*
In conclusion: It's time to listen to the people - the vast majority - who are opposed to this extension. People not profits.


Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
John Brown
42 Dalveen Road
Bolwarra Hts 2320

0249301661

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry expansion because it will have a direct impact on my family. I am concerned about the increase in noise, dust and road damage that the increased truck movements will cause. I have one child who is a red P plater and one who is about to learn to drive and I believe it will be more dangerous for them to turn onto Brandy Hill Drive (and off it into our street) if the truck numbers increase. With the number of trucks in the area now I have incurred several broken windscreens. I am concerned that this will only worsen with more trucks on the road. The suggested numbers are extremely high and anyone looking to buy in our area will be very unimpressed which will cause property values to drop all around Brandy Hill. There are other alternatives for the quarry, including the use of rail, which make much more sense.

Please see attached submission from NSW Health - Hunter New England Local Health District.

See attached document

I live on the main road leading into Paterson and am woken up at 5.45am six days a week with the bumping along of empty trucks making their way to the quarry. When my family visit with children, they suffer the same interruption to a normal night's sleep. When the loaded trucks return it is impossible to hold a conversation with anyone outside my home. Beside the noise of the trucks, my windows rattle and one of the front windows has been cracked. The roads of Paterson are not built for such heavy haulage and our historic buildings must be suffering. My life is being compacted now without any consideration to a huge increase in tonnage rumbling through the village and past my front gate.

Please be advised that we support this DA

.

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion due to road transport arrangements proposed for reasons detailed on attachment below