Martins Creek Quarry Project

I absolutely and very strongly object to the proposal by Daracon to increase the extraction tonnage, hours and truck movements currently in place at the Martins Creek Quarry. As a Paterson resident I have first hand exposure to the negative consequences of the quarries current activities. This beautiful country town and the other affected communities have been blighted by issues such as damage to the local environment, decreased air quality during blasting, noise pollution, dangerous driving of quarry trucks and serious deterioration of road quality as a result of the excessive volume of truck traffic. I believe Daracon's current practice to be illegal as they have consistently exceeded the consented levels of rock quarrying, and as such, find the idea of an increase in operations utterly ludicrous.

truck noise equivalent to 10,000 cars increased hours of operation 6/days week
traffic congestion 80 trucks /hr plus along tocal -Paterson rd
with school traffic / bus traffic carrying school children pick up drop off points along these two roads
shift workers in our house hold to night shift traffic noise evidient and also through early hours of morning
quality of life deteriorating due to hearing trucks coming from 80km zone presumably to 60km zone what a joke !! they continue to travel 80km till speed sign evident on tocal rd well into built up area
property value - decrease in valuation due to traffic along tocal rd
use of gravel area at the back of our block to have majority of day have several parked trucks there having breaks or waiting for martins creek quarry to open or on the way returning to martins creek quarry for further loading come from 60 kms zone to dirt piece of land to park causing dust and soil, erosion
when wet become corrugated area where walkers young children walking to catch buses or just walking animals during day a hazard
travelling from martins creek quarry travelling 60km zone presumably coming of disembark off road to an immediate stopping breaking noise/ but dangerous to walkers/but noise is very evident
safety and deterioration of our local roads we fund by our taxes /rates frequent repairs
wildlife disrupted with expansion whether at site area to the final destination of of leaving load
please use rail access its there for your useage why invent further destruction to our environment and pollution ie noise ,air ,land ,neighbours ,were we live for the future

Dear Sirs,
We are new to the area having retired to our new home at the beginning of 2016. The purpose for moving to Paterson was lifestyle and being reasonably close to amenities whilst enjoying a quiet environment in our retirement. We were fully aware before we moved to Paterson of the number of trucks going back and forth to the quarry but were not prepared for the environmental impact these large trucks were to have. Both my Wife and I drive but my Wife now is very reluctant to drive where we might come across quarry trucks as they are very intimidating when they speed up behind you and all you see in the rear view mirror is the trucks grill, and the continued cost in repairing the roads which break up very quickly will be very costly. If my Wife is nervous now because of intimidation how will she be in years to come, I fear for her health and we do not wish to become prisoners in our own home. We do not now want to be forced to leave such a beautiful area. Please do not allow for this proposal to be granted, you will ruin this country side for the generations to come.

November 23rd 2016

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Martins Creek Quarry SSD 14 - 1612

We are writing with great concern over the recent development of proposals for expansion to the Martins Creek Quarry.

The concerns relate to the completely unbalanced impacts of a single business over many communities including not just Paterson, but Bolwarra Heights and other residential hubs along the truck routes.

In our experience of living in this area, the road conditions are frequently a hazard and it would seem to be a threatening decision to give any further credence to the political and economic demands which the company are no doubt perpetuating.

There are many considerations required as part of EIS investigations, and it appears that that the proposed operations have extreme negative impacts on many fronts - traffic, roads, noise, vibration and long term viability of maintaining a healthy and happy community. This is not considered an acceptable compromise for an operation which is entirely out of scale with its location.

We would request that a quick and sharp end be put to the mine expansion proposal assessment as it is entirely unfair to be creating such a high degree of anxiety over so many peoples lives and well being.

It is even more untenable to consider truck usage in the context of the availability of rail expansion. This surely is the only responsible option. Operations should have neutral impact on the community infrastructure - there is no reasoning for anything but. There is no right for such an operation to impact detrimentally on the conditions that my family live in on a daily basis.

Of particular concern is the danger that well over 400 trucks a day will have on our school community. School buses, including the one that our daughter catches, travel on the same road as the trucks. There is a particularly dangerous intersection near the police station from the school road. A truck, only in recent days overturned near this corner just on 3pm. Imagine if another truck and a school bus were in the vicinity at the time. It could easily have happened, and been an incredible and avoidable tragedy.

Again, it is absolutely unreasonable to place these pressures on a tiny community whose infrastructure has been developed exactly for that - a tiny community.

The proposed operations are ridiculously out of scale with what Paterson can service.

In addition, the suggested road alterations near the Post Office and main store are entirely inappropriate, and remove the ability to access our services with trucks given the go ahead to engineer turning circles, just for their convenience, speed and for the profit of one business. Is that not ridiculous? They should not be placing these pressures on the village.

The road network clearly cannot sustain the impact of trucks already, let along the increase of movements proposed. Why should the community have to suffer the inconvenience of major delays which occur throughout the year, to keep the roads in one piece? This, for the profits of one company, who bring no benefit to Paterson.

We have attended the community meetings and witnessed the anguish that the proposal is genuinely causing people.

These concerns must be taken seriously, and the expansion proposal not supported in the interests of the entire locality, households and surrounds where the quarry is located.

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion.

My opposition to the physical expansion, increase in production and expansion of operating
hours is based on the following.

As a resident of the Vacy area for some years and a road user with a young family I am very concerned with the the proposal to expand hours and production.
I believe the increased truck movements increases the potential danger on our narrow country roads and in our local villages.
Increased truck movements means increased road damage.
The proposed intersection of Dungog Rd and the proposed new quarry entry road would be dangerously located on s windy section of road.
Every road access to the quarry entails crossing at least 1 single lane bridge where no truck really wants to give way to a car.

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion.

My opposition to the physical expansion, increase in production and expansion of operating
hours is based on the following.

As a resident of the Vacy area for some years and a road user with a young family I am very concerned with the proposal to expand hours and production.
I believe the increased truck movements increases the potential danger on our narrow country roads and in our local villages.
Increased truck movements means increased road damage.
The proposed intersection of Dungog Rd and the proposed new quarry entry road would be dangerously located on s windy section of road.
Every road access to the quarry entails crossing at least 1 single lane bridge where no truck really wants to give way to a car.

I oppose the Martin Creek Quarry Expansion.

Having lived in Seaham for well over 10 years, I have extreme concerns for increasing and diversifying the production of the quarry.

I have 2 school aged children who catch the bus from the corner of Seaham Road and Sophia Jane Drive. They are continuously subjected to dust, grit, and gravel spraying off the trucks and causing injuries. I have also had several windscreens damaged by gravel falling of the trucks.

The council is currently unable to architect a road which is suitable to support the flood prone terrain coupled with 33 tonne trucks. To increase the traffic would be both irresponsible and dangerous.

I moved to our property that is classed as "rural" to enjoy the rural lifestyle. I feel it is too dangerous to walk or cycle on the country roads when the local quarries are in operation.

Should this expansion happen, then the advantages rural lifestyle would be so heavily compromised that it is unlikely that I would continue to live in this area.

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion.

My opposition to the physical expansion, increase in production and expansion of operating
hours is based on the following.

As a resident of Paterson village for some years and as a pedestrian and road user with a young family I am very concerned with the proposal to expand hours and production.
The main road through Paterson is periodically cut by floodwater at which time traffic can be diverted directly past our house. The increase in truck traffic by whatever route through Paterson is a catastrophe in the making.
I believe the increased truck movements increases the potential danger on our narrow country roads and in our local villages.
Increased truck movements means increased road damage.

Please reconsider. I live and work in this town, it is a lovely, peaceful, rural community. This proposal will change the town into a busy, noisy, dangerous area. I have three foster children and one biological child who are growing here, we did not move here from Sydney to have constant heavy traffic on the roads. The roads are damaged enough without more trucks. I have to replace all my tyres every 6 months from hitting potholes from your trucks. I am also concerned environmentally about the 100 acres and the native species in the area as well as parking for the locals in town.

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion.

My opposition to the physical expansion, increase in production and expansion of operating
hours is based on the following.

As a resident of Paterson village for some years and as a pedestrian and road user with a young family I am very concerned with the proposal to expand hours and production.
The main road through Paterson is periodically cut by floodwater at which time traffic can be diverted directly past our house. The increase in truck traffic by whatever route through Paterson is a catastrophe in the making.
I believe the increased truck movements increases the potential danger on our narrow country roads and in our local villages.
Increased truck movements means increased road damage.

I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion......and am writing to outline some of my reasons for doing so.

1. The proposed expansion of the quarry with the request of extracting 1.5 million tonnes of material per annum represents a 100% increase on what was ILLEGALLY occurring in 2014 and 2015 and could therefore result in 80 TRUCK MOVEMENTS per HOUR over haulage routes in the area......including right through the small historic village of Paterson. This would virtually result in a non stop cavalcade through the small business and tourist centre of the village. Surely this is a totally ludicrous proposition...

2. There should really be no need to expound any further why this proposal would only exacerbate the existing issues already experienced in the village and suburbs all along the trucking routs. But to list some....increase in noise and vibration and road damage. Then there are safety issues around so many large vehicles moving through a high pedestrian business and supposedly tourist area in the Paterson village.

3. How bed and breakfast business in the village are expected to be able to operate successfully, given not only the number of already existing truck movements but a proposed doubling of movements and extension of days and hours of operation is beyond reason.

4. Finally, WHY should one business, Martins Creek Quarry, be permitted to have such huge negative impact on so many residents and other business in the area. The current owner should have been well aware from the outset that his intentions of expansion would be completely inappropriate given the nature of the pre-existing and surrounding historic villages and residential areas. To have not factored that in prior to buying the business is surely not anything near a valid reason to now expect to override the needs, safety, livelihoods, property values and living amenity of so many other rate and taxpayers who work and lived in the impacted areas. Many have done so long before Daracon purchased the quarry.

I object to the expansion proposal as per my attached document below.

In my opinion the quarry at Martins Creek currently has a negative impact on the local area.

The roads are inadequate structurally - and continuously have large potholes and broken gutters. I have spoken to the local council on more than one occasion when I have considered the roads to be unsafe. To increase the amount of traffic so considerable - especially when you consider the speed, size and weight of these trucks is unsafe.

Seaham is classed as a rural area. I moved to the area over 10 years ago, so I could enjoy the rural lifestyle. I feel at times that I am a prisoner in my own home, The roads are unsafe to walk or run on. The size of the trucks means you have to continually stop running in order to clamber over ditches to get out of the way. Being in the garden - which should be tranquil is continuously interrupted by the sound of compression breaking.

I do not want these problems to get worse - without resolving the mess that they are currently creating.

I think the current TV advert for people who deface their environment by littering has the slogan: "Don't be a tosser!:

Director - Resource Assessments
Planning Services
Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Sydney NSW 2001

Stuart Fullerton
4 Wesley Street
Bolwarra Heights 2320

Ref: SSD 14 _6612 Martins Creek Quarry Expansion

Dear Sir/Madam,
I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion for the following reasons:
The proponent is asking for an increase in extraction tonnage from an amount of over 900,000 p.a. This is more than 300% more than is asserted by Dungog Council who were party to the original deal! How is this even possible or allowable? To seek an increase on something you have no rights to? This dispute, as you are no doubt aware, is between the proponent and Dungog Council. This highly disputed and contentious currently permitted tonnage is a central component of the proponent's application, extraction tonnage.
Whilst this matter is before the courts I do not believe this submission is valid in that it claims to be an increase of tonnage from what is a highly disputed base amount currently. I believe the proponent should be given an order to cease and desist trading above the disputed tonnage and that they should comply with all terms and conditions of that approval and ship, the majority of that legal tonnage by rail.
Whilst we noted your comments regarding this point, that these matters are two separate processes and could continue simultaneously, I do not agree. Whilst in principle it should be possible, in this instance an essential component of the proposal involves disputed tonnage levels. I fear this could result in further legal disputation in future and a region further exposed and subjected to the consequences of this, allegedly, illegal tonnage on our suburban and rural streets.
I sit here at home indoors, approximately 100 metres from Tocal Road reflecting on this entire process quietly enduring a seemingly incessant stream of heavy vehicles banging and crashing their way noisily to and from the quarry along Tocal Road. It's just another day, 13.00. The house shakes a bit and the vibrations can be felt. It starts a little later in the morning recently from around 5 a.m. We're woken every morning to the musical sound of heavy vehicles speeding past and searching out every bump and pothole. Amy genuine measurement of these noise levels will find that they are significant, unreasonable and unacceptable.

I remain astounded at the appalling contradictions in the enforcement of noise level regulations. Trucks can wake us from our slumber at any hour of the day or night but if a neighbour or contractor started up a mower or noisy power tool before 7 a.m. we could report it and expect something would be done, immediately! Yet nothing is done to address the noise abatement issues from deafening trucks?
During the period that the proponent was supplying a project in Hexham, 2014, the levels of vehicle movement passed what had already been an unacceptable number and we found our neighbours were also suffering serious disruptions with sleep deprivation and the inability to escape the constant noise and vibrations. Our gardens were too noisy to have a conversation or a phone call let alone enjoy some amenity. We had our section of Tocal Road expedited in its renovation/upgrade which for a time reduced some of the noise impacts but potholes soon appear and the truck symphony gets its big base drums back.
My wife and I walk our dogs at 7 a.m. and walk along Tocal Road to Paterson Road and further and back. On far too many occasions we have had to try to take cover behind anything and cower as these trucks speed through well in excess of the designated speed limit and due to the winding nature of the road and lack of any shoulder or verge it's terrifying to be walking towards these speeding monsters wondering whether they'll make the corner or not. This is one of Maitland's only streets with no on-street parking and telegraph poles inches from the road doesn't help make things any safer. We've advised the police, as have many others, who had stepped up patrols but were and are hampered in their ability to effectively monitor speed limits due to the narrow roads and many bends.
We've had private meetings with the owner David Mingay and his associates to voice our concerns directly to them. We've participated in every meeting regarding this project and taken part in the farcical process of "community consultation" where the main issues could not be discussed with Daracon and all of it for no result. The proponent will not try to reach a compromise on tonnage, (number of vehicles per hour) hours of operation, traffic and customer management systems and processes, methods of delivery or, in reality, address any of the residents' deep and serious concerns with the levels of noise, dust and other pollutants we're being exposed to or the increased levels of danger posed by the excessive numbers of heavy vehicles in our streets. As a consequence of our dealings with this company we express no faith in the management.

The proponent freely expresses the fact that they have no control over the behaviour of these heavy vehicles other than their own Daracon trucks of which there are 19. The vast majority of all heavy vehicles to and from Martins Creek Quarry are not Daracon vehicles. We gained a commitment that Daracon trucks would observe the speed limit through our section of Tocal Road or less, which became rather a pyritic result given how few Daracon trucks there are.
Now that you have had the opportunity to view the haul routes I believe you should have a much clearer view of how ludicrous this concept of pumping large numbers of heavy vehicles through Paterson and along the designated haul routes is. You witnessed how dangerous, impractical and impossible it is for these heavy vehicles to navigate safely around one or two of those corners through Paterson. I believe that the truck haul routes are unsuitable and will pose an unnecessary risk elevation to other road users and pedestrians. That there have been no serious crashes or fatalities has been as a result of sheer good luck and should not be allowed to substitute for good management practises, effective supervision and suitable distribution methods for product delivery.

Quarry operations throughout the area need to be viewed and considered with regard to their cumulative impacts. Brandy Hill quarry expansion (application #5899) also seeks planning approval to increase production to 1.5 million tonnes p.a. and extend their hours of operations to 24/7 Any increase in tonnage from one quarry adds to already unacceptable numbers of heavy vehicles throughout the area. The productivity losses suffered by the entire community along the designated routes and their interfaces with Melbourne Street, New England Highway would be appalling. How many trucks would end up stacked nose to tail as only one or two at a time can progress through a light change.
A Moratorium on all quarry tonnage increases until an enquiry is completed to reduce the social and environmental impacts of transporting these products needs to be imposed till a fully funded plan is implemented to transport the products sustainably, effectively and equitably with due regard for residents' concerns.
I'm pleased Daracon has finally managed to submit their EIS and their application for a new and full DA for Martins Creek Quarry which will hopefully see effective and enforceable regulations of quarry operations and truck movements throughout the life of the quarry.
This process has taken far too long. It is deeply regrettable that delays are in the proponent's interests, ensuring this process take as long as possible whilst enjoying windfall profits, flagrantly disregarding residents' concerns, the terms and conditions of the current DA with no legal basis for their current levels of production.
Personally, I find it galling that Daracon is gaining itself a monopoly on regional projects with their signs on innumerable sites whilst disregarding the damage they're causing the community and the environment. Trucks from quarries, in particular, are causing significant negative impacts on quality of life and social amenity. We've witnessed the industrialising of our quiet semi-rural and suburban roads to an intolerable level that would be unacceptable in any other area or for any other product such as coal. The few jobs the proponent asserts will be created are more than offset by the loss of so many other jobs and enterprises most especially in the hospitality and tourism sectors. How can one company be allowed to take so much from so many and for so long? I accept that a reduced haulage route does mean a reduction in costs of material but at what price to the rest of the community?
I think you should approve the tonnage levels that Daracon purchased i.e. 300,000 tonnes p/a with 75% to be shipped along rail network and Monday to Friday operations 8 a.m. till 4 p.m. At the time of purchase from the SRA the proponent knew full well the tonnage and operational restrictions on this sensitive site and area. There is no doubt they have enjoyed substantial windfall profits given their disregard for any restrictions on their operations or tonnage since then. This would see no harm to them and a return to no harm for the community. Return them what they purchased.
There needs to be a substantial reduction in truck numbers through greater use of the rail capacity of the quarry through the establishment of a rail distribution centre linked to major road infrastructure. Truck numbers need to reflect the actual truck numbers in and out of the quarry whether delivering material to site or moving material off site.
There needs to be a limit on the hours of operation of the quarry with regards to its transport corridor through residential areas. Quarry open at 8 still would have trucks through Bolwarra at 6.30 to 7 a.m.
I have lived in this area for 18 years and have noticed the increase in traffic volume through our area. The Maitland region is rapidly growing and a major NSW growth area. These increased levels of vehicle movements are already placing great strain on the existing infrastructure. Ratepayers in Maitland are already facing an annual increase in rates of 7% for the next 7 years!
Improved road resurfacing along the quarry transport corridor by ample and considerable ongoing contributions from quarry operations throughout the life of the quarry in the form of a levy indexed to tonnage to satisfactorily repair/replace/upgrade the road systems heavily degraded by their tonnage. Their needs to be a retrospective payment by the proponent for damage already done to infrastructure.
Any and all trucks need to be suitable and fit for purpose giving due regard to the many kilometres of suburban and country roads they will traverse and suitably equipped to limit noise in residential areas and regularly checked by RMS.

Thank you for your consideration.

I have not made a reportable political donation

Kind Regards
Stuart Fullerton

To : Director - Resource Assessments
Planning Services
Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Sydney NSW 2001

Lintje Tjahjadi
4 Wesley Street
Bolwarra Heights 2320

Ref: SSD 14 _6612 Martins Creek Quarry Expansion

Dear Sir/Madam,
I oppose the Martins Creek Quarry Expansion for the following reasons:
NOISE
I have lived in Wesley St, Bolwarra Heights for the last 18 years. Every morning for the last few years at around 4:30 to 5 a.m. I get woken up by the loud banging noises from trucks going towards Martins Creek Quarry. The truck run at high speed without any considering for the neighbourhood and residents at the time of a morning. These disruptions have affected my personal well-being and my quality of life and the life of others living in this neighbourhood.
ENVIRONMENT IMPACT & AIR QUALITY
The dust and fumes from the truck affect the air quality in the area and the emissions from the diesel contain substances that can increase the risk of lung cancer and, therefore this proposal to increase tonnage is hazardous for the community and should be stopped.
Martins Creek Quarry has been operating beyond its 300,000 tonnes p.a. for the last few years and as the result the traffic along the Tocal, Paterson, Belmore and through the third river crossing has become so congested. Tocal road itself is so narrow and winding that truck running at more than the speed limit of 60kmh is an accident waiting to happen.
The proposal from Daracon to increase its production to 1.5million tonnes p.a. is not viable because the infrastructure of the road is not suitable. Tocal and Paterson Roads are a corridor for tourists going to the Barrington Tops and the proximity of the quarry to the historic township of Paterson will further congest traffic with this expansion.
The 37ha vegetation clearance to accommodate this expansion is not appropriate as the area is home to endangered wildlife such as Koala and other habitat and to relocate their existence for one selfish greedy company is beyond comprehension.
The expansion will result in property devaluation along the haul routes as the road will become like an industrial zone rather than a semi rural environement.
In my opinion the operation of the quarry should be reduced to an acceptable operation and regularly monitored and apply heavy fines for any breaches.
My proposal would be:
1. Limit the operating hours from 7 am to 4 pm, Monday to Friday only
2. Impose the 40kmh limit on the Daracon trucks and its contractor and if they can't control their contractor's truck as David Mingay said at a community meeting then the company should not be allowed to operate anyway. The truck should not be engine braking as a consequence of driving more than the speed limit to avoid loud noises especially in the early hours of the morning.
I therefore urge the NSW Department of Planning and Assessment to reject Daracon's expansion application. This expansion will add little or nothing at all to the welfare of the greater community in the area. The potential job creation due to this expansion will only benefit a very small group of people. The fact that there were 300 residents from Lorn, Bolwarra, Tocal, Martins Creek and Paterson attending the meeting on 2/11/2016 was an indicator how this expansion is very critical to the wellbeing of many people living within the vicinity of the quarry.
It is also important to consider the impact of Martins creek and Brandy Hill quarry application to increase their production to 1.5 million tonnes p.a. and extend their operation to 24hrs Mon-Sun will result in even greater devastation to the greater community in this lovely rural community.
Thank you for your consideration.

I have not made a reportable political donation

Kind Regards
Lintje Tjahjadi

Dear Consent Authority,

SOCIAL IMPACT

1. SEARS

The revised SEARS requires, amongst other things,
an assessment of the likely impacts of the development on the environment, focussing on the specific issues identified below, including:
- a description of the existing environment likely to be affected by the development, using sufficient baseline data;
 an assessment of the likely impacts of all stages of the development, including any cumulative impacts, taking into consideration any relevant laws, environmental planning instruments, guidelines, policies, plans and industry codes of practice;
- a description of the measures that would be implemented to mitigate and/or offset the likely impacts of the development, ... and
- the reasons why the development should be approved having regard to ...social considerations, including the principles of ecologically sustainable development.
Social & Economic - including:
- an assessment of potential impacts on local and regional communities including impacts on social amenity;
- a detailed description of the measures that would be implemented to minimise the adverse social and economic impacts of the development, including any infrastructure improvements, or contributions and/or voluntary planning agreement or similar mechanism;
...
The EIS must:
* describe the consultation process used and demonstrate that effective consultation has occurred;
* describe the issues raised by public authorities, service providers, community groups and landowners;
* identify where the design of the development has been amended in response to issues raised; and
* otherwise demonstrate that issues raised have been appropriately addressed in the assessment.
The EIS appears to be silent on the likely impacts on the social amenity of communities of villages of Paterson, Butterwick, Woodville, Wallalong, Brandy Hill, and Seaham at the least, through which the quarry traffic passes. There are adverse social impacts on the residents caused by extraordinarily high volumes of quarry traffic generated by the current operations of Martins Creek Quarry. The project will only reinforce and intensify those adverse impacts of disturbance and distress from truck noise, more prevalent in the early hours of the mornings, but whenever the quarry is operating. The only mitigating measure is apparently a cap on truck numbers which is already the source of complaint.

2. Environmental Planning Regulation 2000
Schedule 2
Environmental impact statements
(below, read for "environment" the affected villages referred to in this submission)
7 Content of environmental impact statement
(1) An environmental impact statement must also include each of the following:
...
(d) an analysis of the development, activity or infrastructure, including:
(i) ...
(ii) a general description of the environment likely to be affected by the development, activity or infrastructure, together with a detailed description of those aspects of the environment that are likely to be significantly affected, and
(iii) the likely impact on the environment of the development, activity or infrastructure, and
(iv) a full description of the measures proposed to mitigate any adverse effects of the development, activity or infrastructure on the environment, and
...
(f) the reasons justifying the carrying out of the development, activity or infrastructure in the manner proposed, having regard to biophysical, economic and social considerations, including the principles of ecologically sustainable development set out in subclause (4).

...

(4) The principles of ecologically sustainable development are as follows:
(a) the precautionary principle, namely, that if there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In the application of the precautionary principle, public and private decisions should be guided by:
(i) careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment, and
(ii) an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options,
(b) inter-generational equity, namely, that the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment are maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations,...
... (underlining emphases added in the above)

3. DISCUSSION
The utility of an EIS has as its ultimate test the provisions of s. 79C of the EP & A Act 1979. The SEARS point to those matters for consideration in their various respects. Relevantly here, are matters referable to s. 79C (1)(b). The EIS at hand does not appear to consider to any useful depth the likely social impacts of the development affecting the historic village of Paterson and the villages of Butterwick, Woodville, Wallalong, Brandy Hill, Seaham, through which the roads on Route 2 carrying both unladen and laden trucks to and from the quarry, travel. The proponent must have been aware of those likely impacts as a result of community consultation at its CCC meetings with representatives of community groups.
The present Martins Creek truck traffic volumes are unacceptable and have ruined the character and amenity of historic Paterson and parts of the other villages. The quarry project under consideration will not lessen or ameliorate that effect.
The present quarry truck traffic on Paterson Road, Butterwick Road, Brandy Hill Road and Seaham Road is stressful at any time to the ordinary motorist like myself, and the often conga line of quarry truck traffic is, in terms of the public interest , bordering upon the unsafe.
The EIS deals mostly with the economic benefits of the proposal and offers no worthwhile proposal, or at all, to preserve and maintain what little remains of the character and amenity of those villages eroded by the quarry traffic. The underlying precept seems to be that the roads are public roads and the proponent and its contractors have the right to use the roads at large. But such a concept, legal though it may be, is not to the point. The reality is that the past and present intensive early morning use of the roads by quarry traffic is detrimental to the quietude and amenity of the residents in the homes adjacent to the roads. It has also caused distress to the residents and is contrary to the public interest in the public health sense.
In particular, the early morning quarry traffic noise is so intrusive on Maitland Road and Duke Street Paterson that sleep disturbance is the norm for the residents (children included) in their homes on those streets. Diesel oils from those trucks also cover the interior walls of those homes, and the fumes are of great nuisance.
The writer visited one commercial premises on Maitland Road/Duke Street Paterson mid-morning and conversation was impossible when the quarry trucks noisily roared and rattled past those premises.
The large volumes of quarry traffic turning at the intersection of Duke Street and King Street Paterson present a serious threat to the safety of road users and to simply to propose a traffic device to overcome the threat (as some have suggested) is a poor band-aid solution. The trucks using the bridge at the intersection of Maitland and Paterson Roads on Route 2 also provide an unsatisfactory safety issue as a resident has observed in a near collision situation.
No matter what data and conclusions are in the EIS as to the ability or otherwise of roads to carry the truck traffic and the consequential noise generated by that traffic, the simple fact is that the amenity of residents living in their homes adjacent to those roads has been, is currently, and will be further diminished by approval of this project.
It surely is beholden to the consent authority to prevent the further deterioration of that quietude and amenity and also inject some common sense into the project. Here is a development proposal which has, on one view, focused on maximisation of output and profit at the least cost to the proponent. But at what cost to the community?
The opportunity presented by SEPP (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007 clause 16 to transport the greater amount of quarry product by rail should be considered and appropriately implemented so as to reduce road transport of the quarry products that so severely impacts on the villages referred to.
There is a threat of serious and irreversible damage to the communities in the villages and their health ought not to be compromised by the project.
Given the adverse social impacts the project warrants refusal.
Furthermore, the SEARS required inclusion of "the likely interactions between the development and any other existing, approved or proposed extractive industry development in the vicinity of the site (such as the Brandy Hill Quarry)."
The EIS shows no sufficient information on this point to assess the cumulative impacts of the road traffic generated by the development with that generated by the Brandy Hill quarry, on the villages named above, with the exception of Paterson. Those impacts are real and harmful to the communities. The failure to adequately deal with this issue warrants refusal of the project on this ground also.

Yours faithfully,
P. Rees

1. Non compliance to current operating consent conditions should be taken into account and used as an assessment instrument in any application for expansion as it reflects the operators commitment and trustworthiness to comply it's legal obligations and community respect. Daracon has shown little respect for either.
2.Inadequate road design for the volume of traffic proposed. Current issues regarding the one lane bridge at Gostwyck which is under constant repair creates a bottleneck at times and the alternative route through Vacy creates the same issues on Vacy bridge and impacts on another small community for which the roads were never designed to cater for.
Paterson intersection redesign will impact detrimentally on established businesses by reducing already limited parking and also create more difficulty to cross the road with no pedestrian crossings.
Safety of residential entrances will be compromised as the road design in most places will require trucks to stop behind those turning right into drives , one of which services 6 homes just below the proposed new entrance on Dungog Road, just north of Grace Avenue, (We have issues currently when trying to turn right with high speed traffic coming from behind)

Option 1 Ship the majority of product by rail to a siding close to major arterial roads, where it can be safely dispatched to its final location with minimal impact on the local community.

Option 2 Construct a new road on previous quarry holdings to join Martins Creek Road South of Martins Creek and upgrade Martins Creek Road to a standard to carry the volume of traffic required.

Both options minimise the requirement for heavy vehicles to travel across Gostwyck Bridge and travel through the township of Paterson.

The projected life of the quarry should warrant this extent of investment into the future of the quarry and it's surrounding communities.

The expansion of the quarry will expand to 80 trucks per hour travelling through Paterson. The previous expansion application has not been finalised and should be determined first before this application considered. Having operated in breach of the law currently the quarry is still likely to consider the best for the company rather than the company's social license to the community.

Since the increase in truck movements occurred 3 years ago my family have not enjoyed activities such as bike riding because of the danger from truck movements. I am not against the truck contractors making a ling but when your life is so curtailed with danger it is this I am scared of. Recently a Daracon truck ran over a kangaroo on the railway crossing and failed to stop leaving the dead animal on the railway line. The attendant at the service station cleared the dead animal of the track.
A couple of weeks later another daracon truck crossed the railway sideswiping a parked car. He didn't stop. The owner had to contact the company and they did pay for the damages.
The post office intersection was widened 2 years ago to accommodate trucks turning with double bogey trailers. This was good for the trucks but the school bus stop was removed and it remains a very dangerous place for young children to congregate, let alone an adult. Down the main road of Paterson the road is less than 2 lanes wide and trucks frequently cross the middle line dangerously to oncoming traffic.
My son is a motor cycle enthusiast and used frequently ride from Paterson to Gloucester, Dungog, lostock dam but due to danger the trucks present this is something he no longer does. The club he belonged to won't ride through this area as well as other clubs.

The main reason is the damage to the road from truck movements and the danger they present. It is quite sad that a company can have so much affect in the area and forgets the rest of the community that who originally supported the foundation of the quarry.
I do feel for people of Martin's Creek with the blasting operations. The damage that is being caused is worse than the Newcastle Harbour Deepening Project carried by Westham Dredging. The company along with the nsw government accepted liability for the same and peoples properties were repaired.
I also remind you that the Nsw Government limited the blasting operations within certain time periods aswell as other limit requirements.
At the moment without any increase as proposed the quality of life at martin's Creek is poor and unfortunately I have friends I don't visit. If this proposal is approved the property values in the area Williams dramatically, for the benefit of a few.

This proposal will be so detrimental to all people in the area with the loss of tourism, a danger to pedestrian's, a cost to rate payers maintaining road conditions, quality of life with noise and road vibrations.

Martins Creek Quarry

I would like to object to the development in its current form.

According to the EIS for the Martins Creek Quarry expansion heavy truck traffic movements will increase by at least 25% down Brandy Hill Drive. Our Action Group has calculated that this could be up to an extra 80 (40 laden, 40 returning) truck movements per hour.

Brandy Hill Drive is unsuitable for an increase in heavy vehicles as the street already has a number of problems that will be exacerbated by many more heavy trucks.

1. The road is narrow and the road surface is poor. With current traffic the surface has pot holes and wash areas. There are very few areas for safe overtaking. There are limited opportunities for pulling off the road as the drains are just ditches of varying depth in the road side.

2. There is no footpath for pedestrians and riding horses. There are parts of the road where the only access for pedestrians is on the road as the surrounds are unsuitable.

3. Every 50 to 100m there is an entry into a house block. It already difficult to turn when there is a truck tailgating. With more trucks this will only be more difficult and dangerous.

4. The school buses have to stop on the road to pick up students especially in the wet as there are few pull off areas to pick up children. Buses have to pull out slowly. More trucks will increase the danger of a rear end bus crash. And there are no zebra crossings on the road for children to access the other side of the road safely with lots of heavy traffic.

5. The area is a residential area. People here work and contribute to the economy. We need to sleep. It is unacceptable for trucks to start down Brandy Hill Drive earlier than 6 am and to finish later than 6pm. To do so will reduce the amenity of Brandy Hill and reduce property values.

6. According to the EIS some of the truck drivers are not the responsibility of the quarry. When I am tailgated, or the school bus is overtaken by a truck over double lines, there are no consequences. Irresponsible behavior by truck drivers has no consequences (except if they injure someone). This behavior already happens. With the narrow road, residential access issues and hugely increased heavy vehicle use, it is settling up an unsafe situation. There needs to be a central contact point for all reporting of dangerous driving by truck drivers and reports produced for the public on the outcome of the reporting.

I live on the narrow section of Tocal Road between Hilldale Drive and the Paterson Road intersection at the service station. Pedestrians walking along the footpath here are only 1.2m from traffic travelling at 60kph. I have been out with a tape measure - the footpath is 1.2m from the white line at the side of the road and the gutter is 800mm. No pedestrian is safe in this situation. It is quite terrifying as vehicles are aimed straight at pedestrians as they follow the curve of the road and the wind turbulence makes it hard to stand still - a child would easily lose his/her footing.

Currently children moving to and from the bus stop walk 1.2m away from trucks travelling at 60kph. This is frightening and dangerous.

The volume of traffic at present is such that it is not easy to cross the road during the day because vehicles approaching from the Paterson side do not slow down until they reach the speed checker which is well past the Hilldale Drive intersection. The current traffic travelling at 60kph makes turning in and out of driveways hazardous often as not.

I strongly object to this road being subject to increased truck traffic from the Martins Creek Quarry expansion. It was never designed to take high volumes of traffic and was never intended to be a trucking thoroughfare. It is not a safe road for pedestrians and homeowners now, and with increased truck volumes would be likely to become a black spot for accidents. To call them accidents is not correct, as to knowingly increase the traffic in view of the above is to deliberately court disaster.

Truck movements from the quarry were legally bound to be of limited number but have been increased beyond this over the years. Any further use of Tocal Road as a means of moving quarry products is contrary to safety standards for a road of this width and such close proximity to family homes.

I strongly object to increased truck movements along Tocal Road and believe the viable alternative of using the rail system should be a condition of any expansion of the quarry.

I ask that those making decisions about this matter accept that they have a responsibility for the safety of the community and should not approve this inappropriate road usage.