Monaro Rock Quarry Project

I object to the proposal because of the negative impacts it will have on our lives and the lives of the residents of Royalla and the surrounding region because:

the applicant has documented in the SIA the negative future impacts on the Royalla community and particularly that of my wife’s property and those in her close proximity.

that even though the proposal suggest that the company can manage and monitor the air quality including the silica dust, science is conclusive that no amount of silica dust can be considered safe for humans therefore how can this be acceptable in close proximity to residential areas.

the need for an additional quarry in the Royalla area has not been adequately demonstrated,

land values have been effected and there is no suggestion of any compensation for those in the immediate area

of the huge increase in volume of the heavy vehicle traffic, the road damage and associated traffic hazards. Already existing road damage takes weeks or months to get repaired,

low to high noise, dust and traffic impacts as identified in the proposal

I object to this project on two grounds, firstly community health and the impact this project with on my family and friends who live in this area: and secondly the misrespentation in the EIS that this is just a medium scale quarry, rather than the actuality that this is a major extraction quarry combined with a concrete batching plant and an asphalt production plant. Science agrees that silica dust
environmental impacts, in terms of human health, can extend up to 20 kilometers from the quarry site. This has the ability to affect the tens of thousands of peoples living in the immediate area. For this reason alone, this quarry should not proceed.
The EIS covers the development of a quarry with up to 500 loaded truck entries to an already a busy highway per day. These vehicle movements cover the movement of quarry products only and miss the additional movements required by the development of the concrete and asphalt plants. As these additional plants are not adequately covered by the EIS, that document mispresents the effects of the totally of the development to our local community and to the state government itself.
I firmly believe that this development is misrepresented in the supporting documentation and should not be proceeded with.
Sincerely