Martins Creek Quarry Project

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion. I'm concerned about the pollution, dust, noise and damage that will be caused by the increased truck movements (multiple hundreds of truck movements along 26km of sub arterial council maintained roads through rural and urban communities six days per week). I think it will lead to depreciation of value of properties and make Tocal Road too dangerous, causing youth not being able to cycle to school and sport clubs anymore.

I OPPOSE the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion for the following reasons:
1. The roads both in the Dungog Shire area and surrounds are not suitable for these large double rigs. As a former resident of Merchants Road, Martins Creek I know only too well the effect these vehicles have on the narrow, winding roads in the area.
In fact the trucks were the main reason we moved. We could no longer ride our horses along the roads, and I certainly didn't want my 17yo daughter learning to drive sharing these roads with so many large double rigs.
2. The extended hours of operation of the quarry show complete disregard for the residents of both Martins Creek & Paterson. Having so many truck movements through these small towns will have a devastating effect on the businesses and residents (due to noise, vibration) and just the extreme danger presented by these trucks when turning near the Post Office at Paterson.
3. More clearing of land surrounding the quarry will destroy vital habitats for flora & fauna.
4. The blasting is causing damage to houses kilometres away. Also many buildings in the Paterson area have already been damaged by the cont\stant truck movements. Imagine what will happen if the current movements are increased.
5. Originally all quarry product had to be taken out by rail - which is the commonsense solution. The only exceptions were if the delivery was local. I don't know how, why or who changed these rules, but it has had a devastating impact on this beautiful area, and these unique rural villages.

Please - if they must increase the production, at least ensure it goes out by rail - not by road which is dangerous and destructive

I strongly object to the proposed expansion of the operations of Martins Creek Quarry. The current road infrastructure cannot cope with the proposed increase in truck movements, particularly the build up of traffic and congestion that will occur at the rail crossing in Paterson due to train movements. Also over Gostwyck Bridge. The massive increased in truck movements will destroy the amenity of the area and the quality of lifestyle for local residents. It will also cause massive damage to roads and bridges without anywhere near the level of funding contributions to local councils from the Quarry operators required to compensate. The vast majority of residents strongly oppose the proposed expansion and this should be enough reason on its own to stop the proposal. It is our Shire and we do not want the expansion. The proposal comes against a backdrop of a complete failure to plan for and provide infrastructure that would be required to accommodate it. For example, the number of truck movements requires a railway over or underpass at Paterson, a pedestrian crossing in Paterson with traffic lights, a pedestrian crossing at Tocal College with traffic lights, and so it goes on. I strongly oppose the proposal.

I Object to the Martin's Creek Quarry Expansion.

I live on one of the only parts of Paterson Rd that has not been widened in recent years. I have lived here for 15 years. My house is very close to the road. The trucks start rumbling past at 4.30 am. It is very difficult to sleep in the front of the house once the trucks start, and they sound as if they are about to come through the wall. I am also concerned increased truck movements will deteriorate the road, and may cause damage to my house through increased vibrations.
I am further concerned because there are now 2 child care venues on Paterson Rd, and I am concerned that the increased truck movements on Paterson Rd may cause an accident with a vehicle attempting to access or egress those premises.

The increased truck movements will also negatively impact the traffic flow into and out of Maitland at peak times. The Third River Crossing has significantly reduced traffic congestion into Lorn, if the Quarry expansion goes ahead, I am concerned that the traffic congestion will increase to prior third crossing levels.

See attached

Please see the attached pdf

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry expansion due to several reasons.
1. The impact on road pavement which is already under stress from current road users.
2. Entering onto Brandy Hill Drive from our street will certainly be adversely affected with proposed extra truck movements.
3.Road safety for school children and pedestrians walking along Brandy hill drive with no formed footpaths ,with so many trucks passing each other.
4.Noise impact will certainly affect our current rural lifestyle.

GP Staines Watercart Hire
Gregory Staines
0414 792 802


DIRECTOR RESOUCRE ASSESSMENTS

c/-The Secretary
NSW Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001
DATE: November 2016

Martins Creek Quarry Project SSD 14_6612 - Letter of Support

Dear Sir
G.P.Staines Watercart Hire would like to register our support for the Martins Creek Quarry Project.
We are contracted by Daracon to provide Grader and Watercart services. We have a long standing relationship of 18 years with Daracon, primarily in the Sydney area. As Daracon continues to grow, they are helping sole traders like me grow too. Without the support of Daracon our business would not be as fortunate.

G.P. Staines Watercart Hire confirms it support for the Martins Creek Quarry Project

Yours sincerely

Gregory Staines

Please see attached pdf

I oppose any expansion to martins creek quarry, I live at 256 dungog rd martins creek and my name is Scott Meehan.
I live through the current hell daracon calls working within their current approvals? Which I highly doubt, excessive truck movements all of which are on air brakes straight past my front door every day, cowboy contractors driving recklessly putting local residents in danger, I wonder when the fatality will occur not if, and that's at the moment.
Daracon hold no regard for operating within their working guidelines and blatantly disregard them, this is fact. They as a company are not and have never operated within the guidelines of their approvals, no regard for near residents who have to live with their actions. Blasting to the point my new shed slab has cracked to the point it needs pulling up, who pays for that?
The dust has its own issues, I see thick plumes rising in the air every day I come home, straight over the quarry, we can't hang clothes outside ever as the dust just coats everything. The noise of dozer tracks rattling, trays banging, drills and blasting make life hell as it is, no way ever should they be even doing what they do already. I believe out of all the residents I will be affected the most as the new entrance will be 400m from my front door!!!!
No way, not ever will this expansion be approved and if it does I think a reshuffle and sackings of the current planning department needs to be done, it seems like collusion I'd say at this point.
No way will this be approved on my doorstep.
Yours in good faith
Scott Meehan

I object to the proposed expansion of removal of material from Martins Creek quarry , based on the following. As a local resident I am siuck of the appalling road conditions along the main haul routes

Gostwyck Bridge is a potential disaster waiting to happen. In the last 2 years I have witnessed or been part of a potential disaster as trucks leaving Martins Creek have forced northbound vehicles already between the bridge and the give way sign/orange warning lights to reverse off the bridge. This is unacceptable.

In 2015 a young platypus was found dead in the creek which drains from the quarry to the Paterson river. The platypus had unsightly skin lesions which could be attributed to the often milky coloured water coming down the creek.

The area to be cleared for the expansion of the quarry is part of an area which has a reasonable localised population of the threatened brushtailed phascogyle.

Many large extractive industries operating in small communities and impacting on the surrounding communities have a significant contibution (either monetary, material or labour) into those communities. I have no knowledge of this occurring in the case at hand.

The extent of blasting and repercussions of this blasting have increased dramatically. I could not understand why our back verandah concrete had cracked over the last few years until listening to people at the meeting in Paterson recently and hearing of the damage caused to their homes.

The passage through Pateron village is not suited to the number of trucks passing through it now let alone coping with an increase to 80 movements per hour. There is no pedestrian crossing/lights anywhere. I recently followed a truck coming from the quarry travelling at 95 k/hour to the N of Paterson, crossing the centreline at the PO by 2 metres and doing 60km/hr by the lagoon after straightening out the corner by the old rectory.

I object to the proposal to expand the Martins Creek quarry to 1.5 million tonnes per annum.
My principal reasons are:
1. The increased truck traffic between Martins Creek and Paterson inevitably associated with any expansion will makes this section of road more difficult to transit and more intimidating to drivers than it already is. The issue is exacerbated by the single lane Goswyck Bridge that all trucks have to cross.
2. The increased truck traffic will make it difficult to move around in Paterson from shop to shop. The size of the trucks, the frequency of trucks during the recent production increase, the speed of trucks through the centre of the village, trucks turning the right angle bend in the centre of the shopping area and the noise add to the feeling of helplessness, especially for we older citizens. There is no concern shown in the EIS for the traffic issues in Paterson.

3. The prospects for rehabilitation of this quarry are concerning. The proponent states an intention to produce 1.5 million tonnes of product for 25 years. Where are the reserves for such a production rate? My calculation of the actual reserves puts the potential extractable tonnage closer to 14 million tonnes.

4. This will not sustain the quarry for that time period.

5. NSW has a poor record of rehabilitating old mining/quarry sites. There is nothing indicated in this EIS that the proponent would actually undertake the work despite the array of staged plans. Anyone with a knowledge of quarry operations can deduce that virtually no rehabilitation is possible during the active life of the quarry. It will be mostly have to be done on abandonment. This is likely to happen much sooner as the reserves are limited, and on past history, the operator walks away. There needs to be a binding bond up front to guarantee that funding is there to rehabilitate the quarry. Proper rehabilitation of that site will require millions of dollars. Who is to pay for that?

6. Since I completed my reserve estimate and forwarded a brief report to the MCQAG on 22 November 2016, I have come into possession of a copy of a 1990 geological report on a proposed quarry in Lot 5, prepared by C. Adamson, Consulting Geologist to the State Rail Authority.
7. Adamson's reserve estimates, determined from drilling not reported in the latest EIS, was that proven reserves in Lot 5 were 8 million tonnes, and probable reserves within the same Lot 5, and surrounding the proven reserves, were an additional 12.2 million tonnes. A good proportion of those reserves have since been extracted.
8. The Andesite was much thicker in Lot 5, ranging between at least 30m and 44m. Adamson indicated it thinning to the southeast towards the old quarry. Adamson also discussed variations in rock quality which I have ignored in determining likely reserves in order to maximise the possible quantity of quarryable rock. Given that the andesite has a lesser thickness in Lot 6, my calculated estimate of 14 million tonnes of rock left in Lots 5 and 6, and north of the old railways quarry (East Pit area) is of the same order as Adamson's calculations for Lot 5.

9. The proponent claims the deposit is rare. That is utter rubbish. The geological sequence of which the Martins Creek Andesite is a part stretches from Raymond Terrace to Rouchel. A glance at the geological maps will confirm that. This site was set up as a quarry because it was to help in construction/maintenance of railway lines. That does not make it rare. Andesite is a commonly quarried material in NSW. DPI statistics indicate this. It is also worth noting that quarries in similar rock were set up near Kiama, and on the Liverpool range for railway purposes, and they were also linked to rail. The nearby Brandy Hill quarry is operating in the same geological volcanic sequence.

10. The reality is the production from Martins Creek could more than adequately be covered by other quarries in the region if it were to close completely. In the overall production of quarry materials its contribution is not large. And it has a freight disadvantage for major infrastructure projects planned closer to Newcastle, when compared with other quarries in the region. I am not advocating its closure as it does provide a useful function locally. I am urging that its production rate be limited to a much lower amount than that proposed in the EIS.

11. I saw the impact on the area when the quarry ran at 1.1 million tonnes for one year. It made life very difficult in Paterson. That rate is too high and I am calling for it to be set much lower A rate of around 600,000 tonnes per annum should be enough to maintain profitable operations and ameliorate conditions for surrounding residents, for example.

12. Of course if the bulk of product, or any increase above 600,000 tonnes per annum went out on rail as it once did, then the argument changes, but the EIS argues why rail cannot be used. It certainly does not argue how it could be. Perhaps this should be re-investigated by an independent party.
In closing I add that I have spent my working life entirely associated with the minerals industry as a geologist and geotechnical engineer. I acknowledge the need for activities such as quarrying, but there also has to be a balance between the community and such operations. Recent years have seen community and environmental issues outweighed by economic needs. Profit making is fine. Our society needs it. But this little part of society around Paterson would be thrown to the wolves just like Bulga, Camberwell, Ravensworth, and Warkworth should this proposal obtain approval for such increased production.

23/11/2016
* * *
Scott & Selina McDonald
134 Paterson Road
Bolwarra, NSW 2320
NSW Department of Planning
Dear Sir/Madam,
We oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion - Application No SSD-16-6612.
Because the increase in the number of trucks and also the proposed increase to the dispatch of road transport hours from 5:30am to 7:00pm Monday to Saturday (6 days per week), this means these trucks will start coming past our place on Paterson Road Bolwarra at approximately 4:00am, normally a very quiet time on Paterson Road.
These trucks are loud at the best on times and especially when travelling empty in the early hours of the morning to the Martins Creek Quarry. This noise will directly affect the sleep patterns and health for those in our home.
The last trucks of the day will be coming past our place at approximately 8:00pm each night for six days a week. So the noise from these trucks will be relentless with our only respite being one day per week. Not good for anyone's physical or mental health and will lead to fatigue which is a major contributing cause to injuries and death on New South Wales roads.
It is worth pointing out that there will only be approximately eight hours between the last truck in the evening and this first truck the next morning. Industry standards state that a worker must have a ten hour break between shifts something that won't happen to us if this expansion is approved.
In addition the increase in these trucks and operating hours will also make it more hazardous when we are trying to enter or leave our property during normal hours as the trucks are very large and difficult to stop in case of an emergency on an already very busy road which isn't designed for this proposed increased volume of heavy vehicle traffic.






Your faithfully
Scott & Selina McDonald

My husband and I object to the expansion of the Martins Creek quarry for the following reasons.
* We have great concerns for the condition of the Gostwyck Bridge, it has been having full time major restoration work for at least the past two years. They are presently working on it during the evening from around 6pm until 1am in the morning four nights a week. This work impacts on our home life with the noise keeping us awake at night.
* If more trucks are crossing the bridge daily then the maintenance on the bridge will be continual, it wasn't built to cope with so much heavy traffic.
* All traffic crossing the bridge is meant to be at a speed of 40km, although I do not own a radar it is obvious that most vehicles are going much faster than 40km. I have witnessed trucks hit the bridge at high speeds from either direction and as it is a one way bridge there are many instances of trucks locking up their brakes as they approach too fast and then right of way traffic enters the bridge from the other side. From my lounge room and back verandah I have an excellent view of the give way approach to the bridge. The more trucks on the road then the more this will happen it will only be a matter of time before there is a major accident and god forbid anyone should end up off the bridge and into the river.
* At present we are kept awake until 1am due to bridge works and then the trucks start to roll through one after the other from 6 am, 5hours sleep is not enough for anyone. Lack of sleep leads to poor concentration that can cause fatigue on the roads and in the work place, it also bad for your health.
* We have concerns for our home, we can hear and feel blasting from the quarry and have many cracks in our walls and nails popping out of our ceiling which we feel are a result of the quarry. If the quarry hours of operation are expanded we fear that our home will suffer more extensive damage.
* We also are concerned for our safety when we leave and enter our driveway onto Dungog road.
* We are concerned for our safety when shopping in Paterson, more trucks will make it harder to safely get in and out of your car.
* At present when freight trains go through Paterson the trucks can be backed right up to Tucker Park. If the expansion goes through there will be more trucks and more freight trains blocking the roads at Martins Creek and Paterson. This will slow down all of our commuting to work and school, we live in a rural area we have long drives every day, our roads are not well maintained freeways. They are narrow and poorly maintained and made worse by excessive trucks using them.
* Damaged roads cause damage to our cars, large potholes cause tyre, rim and suspension problems and damaged pavement leads to stones and rocks being flung from vehicles especially trucks causing windscreen damage.
* As it is now the quarry is tolerable but we are against any further expansion firstly due to road safety and road conditions that are already poor and then due to the impact on our own personal life due to our close proximity to the Gostwyck Bridge, Dungog rd and the Martins Creek Quarry.
We are also concerned about devaluation of our property.

Daracon has been a local presence within the hunter community employing many local residents and providing a lot of community support (through charity events, donations to schools and sporting clubs).
The company provides many services to the region and has played a part in many large infrastructure projects from roads, rail line upgrades, bridges and local subdivisions (of which I live in one they built on behalf of the NSW government).
I believe if the companies ability to provide materials for construction purposes is diminished then opportunities for the company maybe impacted which may result in employees (both internally and externally) loosing their jobs. Not only will it have the potential to impact employment at the company it will also impact the local economy.

I support this application.

G'day

Well, another ill-considered, poorly resolved proposal that will impact adversely on the whole community between Martins Creek and Maitland.

A proposal of well in excess of 1 truck per minute passing through the village-the danger,social, financial and environmental impact to Paterson and the other communities affected by this application well exceeds the merits of the commercial returns to a private company who contribute nothing to our community.

Paterson is well renowned for its sleepy and welcoming environment-bringing tourist dollars into the community. We will lose the amenity and special atmosphere that pervades Paterson and its immediate locale if this proposal is endorsed.

Specifically our families objections are:

1). The village thoroughfare is too small to safely be navigated by the number of trucks movements proposed-they ALREADY significantly impact.

2. The emissions of diesel fumes from vehicles passing through the village in the numbers anticipated will cause significant health risks to local residents.

3. Noise in the village will increase exponentially causing annoyance and possibly health problems to locals.

4. Property prices will be adversely impacted by the proposed volume of traffic-a local Real Estate agent has estimated somewhere in the region of 10-15%.

5.Our community has a large population of families with children-the lifeblood of a rural village. Families will be deterred from residing in Paterson meaning a slow decline in new and contributing residents.

There is little to no support for this application and should it be passed I would suspect a community funded legal challenge to it.

The council has an obligation to ensure local communities and ratepayers who fund its existence do not have their quality of life significantly and adversely impacted by such an application.

Kind regards

Rick Nash, Jacqueline Nash, Aiden and Connor Nash

Please acknowledge our submission by return email, many thanks in advance

See attachment

Please find attached my objection to the EIS

I object to the expansion of the Martins Creek Quarry for the following:
As a frequent user of the road from East Maitland to Dungog I pass through Paterson and Martins Creek and experience contact with trucks in particular at the Historic Bridge over the Paterson River. This scenic drive has been turned into a safety issue with huge trucks passing on narrowly constructed roads not designed for the transportation of heavy materials.
The town of Paterson has become an area to avoid and the locals subjected to early morning noise and dust as trucks travel through, destroying any peaceful lifestyle they deserve.
Martins Creek and nearby residents are experiencing dust, noise and inconvenience as truck movements encroach on their local environment.
The expected loss of habitat for endangered species is a real concern with vegetation on the valley floor diminishing daily, when will it stop!
The profits generated from this venture will not benefit many locals with contract workers making up the majority of workers engaged.