Rocky Hill Coal Mine

The proposed mine is way too close to residential areas.
The proposed pits are only 900m from the Forbesdale residential estate, and barely 3km from Gloucester township. The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Risk of water contamination is high.
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.
The health impacts are far too great.
Gloucester's hospital, its schools, and almost all of its residents are within 5km from the proposed coal pits. Particulate pollution from open-cut mining is known to lead to reduced respiratory health and increased death rates in surrounding communities. It is completely unfair and unjustified to expose the population of Gloucester to these health impacts.
The mine threatens Gloucester's $50 million tourism industry.
Gloucester is a unique and beautiful town on the edge of the Barrington wilderness, and it has a thriving nature-based tourism industry. Open-cut coal mining is completely incompatible with this important local industry, which must be protected.
So-called 'commitments' to reduce mining impacts are not trusted.
The community has no reason to trust either commitments from the mining company made during its application, nor conditions imposed by the Planning Department if approval is given. We have seen elsewhere in Gloucester and the Hunter Valley that these conditions can be changed later, and usually are. Conditions regarding mine rehabilitation, night-time work hours, noise, blasting and dust, and even the footprint of the mine, are untrusted. It is known, for example, that there are plans for a 'Stage 2' of the coal mine. The only acceptable outcome for the Rocky Hill application is to reject it outright.


-

The proposed mine is way too close to residential areas.

The proposed pits are only 900m from the Forbesdale residential estate, and barely 3km from Gloucester township. The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Risk of water contamination is high.

The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.

The health impacts are far too great.

Gloucester's hospital, its schools, and almost all of its residents are within 5km from the proposed coal pits. Particulate pollution from open-cut mining is known to lead to reduced respiratory health and increased death rates in surrounding communities. It is completely unfair and unjustified to expose the population of Gloucester to these health impacts.

The mine threatens Gloucester's $50 million tourism industry.
Gloucester is a unique and beautiful town on the edge of the Barrington wilderness, and it has a thriving nature-based tourism industry. Open-cut coal mining is completely incompatible with this important local industry, which must be protected.

So-called 'commitments' to reduce mining impacts are not trusted.

The community has no reason to trust either commitments from the mining company made during its application, nor conditions imposed by the Planning Department if approval is given. We have seen elsewhere in Gloucester and the Hunter Valley that these conditions can be changed later, and usually are. Conditions regarding mine rehabilitation, night-time work hours, noise, blasting and dust, and even the footprint of the mine, are untrusted. It is known, for example, that there are plans for a 'Stage 2' of the coal mine. The only acceptable outcome for the Rocky Hill application is to reject it outright.

It would be an act of stupidity and sheer vandalism to allow this beautiful valley to be destroyed.

Think about preserving it instead.

The rest of the (intelligent) world is recognising the impacts of dirty coal on our planet, why is NSW so delinquent?

DO NOT ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN.!!!!

The proposed mine is way too close to residential areas.
The proposed pits are only 900m from the Forbesdale residential estate, and barely 3km from Gloucester township. The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Risk of water contamination is high.
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.
The health impacts are far too great.
Gloucester's hospital, its schools, and almost all of its residents are within 5km from the proposed coal pits. Particulate pollution from open-cut mining is known to lead to reduced respiratory health and increased death rates in surrounding communities. It is completely unfair and unjustified to expose the population of Gloucester to these health impacts.
The mine threatens Gloucester's $50 million tourism industry.
Gloucester is a unique and beautiful town on the edge of the Barrington wilderness, and it has a thriving nature-based tourism industry. Open-cut coal mining is completely incompatible with this important local industry, which must be protected.
So-called 'commitments' to reduce mining impacts are not trusted.
The community has no reason to trust either commitments from the mining company made during its application, nor conditions imposed by the Planning Department if approval is given. We have seen elsewhere in Gloucester and the Hunter Valley that these conditions can be changed later, and usually are. Conditions regarding mine rehabilitation, night-time work hours, noise, blasting and dust, and even the footprint of the mine, are untrusted. It is known, for example, that there are plans for a 'Stage 2' of the coal mine. The only acceptable outcome for the Rocky Hill application is to reject it outright.

- See more at: https://www.wilderness.org.au/protect-gloucester-have-your-say-rocky-hill-coal-mine-0#sthash.Mmb6VggY.dpuf

We don't need to dig up more Coal to pollute the atmosphere or power the world.

Floods pose a significant risk for contamination of critical water sources.

The pits will be roughly 3km from Gloucester township, which is insane... Noise, lighting and dust complaints will follow in spades, whilst property values will plummet.

All in the name of profit for a listed company using a non-renewable resource.

The mine is close to Barrington tops - a unique alpine climate at the northern end of of the southern alps. Proceeding with it will only increase degradation of that beautiful environment in a number of ways.

Finally, I am a realist and have significant understanding of the Coal industry and the massive reserves on this planet. If we must dig up Coal, then we should be doing it from existing mines and only until we can stop mainlining the power it provides.

The proposed mine is too close to the residential area of Gloucester. It will impact on the quality of life of the residents. It will also affect the ground water of the area and will certainly have a negative effect on the tourism in the area.

There should be no new coal mines and the agricultural land of NSW should be preserved.

I Oppose the Rocky Hill Coal Mine

I am a bushwalker and use Gloucester for holidays in Barrington Tops ans surrounds. Rocky Hill Coal Mine is an inappropriate and unnecessary development, too close to the community of Gloucester, and a threat to the catchment and the natural attractions that bring visitors and money into Gloucester. There are also risks to residents' health: I was exposed to coal dust, smoke from coal burning, water pollution and heavy transport as I grew up next to a coal mine in Burragorang Valley. My parents suffered asthma, bronchitis, and coronary disease; and cancer affected three of my siblings. Coal mining is no longer justified for economic reasons as it contributes to climate change and associated extreme weather events, damaging natural ecosystems. There are viable renewable alternatives to produce energy so this mine should not be permitted. Yours sincerely, Julie Ho

1. The proposed mine is way too close to residential areas. The proposed pits are only 900m from the Forbesdale residential estate, and barely 3km from Gloucester township. The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.

2. Risk of water contamination is high.
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.

3.The health impacts are far too great. Gloucester's hospital, its schools, and almost all of its residents are within 5km from the proposed coal pits. Particulate pollution from open-cut mining is known to lead to reduced respiratory health and increased death rates in surrounding communities. It is completely unfair and unjustified to expose the population of Gloucester to these health impacts.

4. The mine threatens Gloucester's $50 million tourism industry. Gloucester is a unique and beautiful town on the edge of the Barrington wilderness, and it has a thriving nature-based tourism industry. Open-cut coal mining is completely incompatible with this important local industry, which must be protected.

5. So-called 'commitments' to reduce mining impacts are not trusted. The community has no reason to trust either commitments from the mining company made during its application, nor conditions imposed by the Planning Department if approval is given. We have seen elsewhere in Gloucester and the Hunter Valley that these conditions can be changed later, and usually are. Conditions regarding mine rehabilitation, night-time work hours, noise, blasting and dust, and even the footprint of the mine, are untrusted. It is known, for example, that there are plans for a 'Stage 2' of the coal mine. The only acceptable outcome for the Rocky Hill application is to reject it outright.

I oppose the Rocky Hill Coal Mine. The proposed mine is too close to the community of Gloucester. Coal mining is a seriously polluting industry - polluting air and water. There are risks to residents' health and downstream water recipients if the mine goes ahead.

I strongly appose this Project.

I strongly oppose this project.

The proposed mine is way too close to residential areas.
The proposed pits are only 900m from the Forbesdale residential estate, and barely 3km from Gloucester township. The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Risk of water contamination is high.
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.
The health impacts are far too great.
Gloucester's hospital, its schools, and almost all of its residents are within 5km from the proposed coal pits. Particulate pollution from open-cut mining is known to lead to reduced respiratory health and increased death rates in surrounding communities. It is completely unfair and unjustified to expose the population of Gloucester to these health impacts.
The mine threatens Gloucester's $50 million tourism industry.
Gloucester is a unique and beautiful town on the edge of the Barrington wilderness, and it has a thriving nature-based tourism industry. Open-cut coal mining is completely incompatible with this important local industry, which must be protected.
So-called 'commitments' to reduce mining impacts are not trusted.
The community has no reason to trust either commitments from the mining company made during its application, nor conditions imposed by the Planning Department if approval is given. We have seen elsewhere in Gloucester and the Hunter Valley that these conditions can be changed later, and usually are. Conditions regarding mine rehabilitation, night-time work hours, noise, blasting and dust, and even the footprint of the mine, are untrusted. It is known, for example, that there are plans for a 'Stage 2' of the coal mine. The only acceptable outcome for the Rocky Hill application is to reject it outright.
- See more at: https://www.wilderness.org.au/protect-gloucester-have-your-say-rocky-hill-coal-mine-0#sthash.hDnpBt9I.dpuf

I strongly object to the Rocky Hill project as it is too close to residential areas and multiple environmental issues I have read about from the area and surrounding areas.

The proposed mine is too close to residential areas.
The proposed pits are only 900m from the Forbesdale residential estate, and barely 3km from Gloucester township. The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Risk of water contamination is high.
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.
The health impacts are far too great.
Gloucester's hospital, its schools, and almost all of its residents are within 5km from the proposed coal pits. Particulate pollution from open-cut mining is known to lead to reduced respiratory health and increased death rates in surrounding communities. It is completely unfair and unjustified to expose the population of Gloucester to these health impacts.
The mine threatens Gloucester's $50 million tourism industry.
Gloucester is a unique and beautiful town on the edge of the Barrington wilderness, and it has a thriving nature-based tourism industry. Open-cut coal mining is completely incompatible with this important local industry, which must be protected.
So-called 'commitments' to reduce mining impacts are not trusted.
The community has no reason to trust either commitments from the mining company made during its application, nor conditions imposed by the Planning Department if approval is given. We have seen elsewhere in Gloucester and the Hunter Valley that these conditions can be changed later, and usually are. Conditions regarding mine rehabilitation, night-time work hours, noise, blasting and dust, and even the footprint of the mine, are untrusted. It is known, for example, that there are plans for a 'Stage 2' of the coal mine. The only acceptable outcome for the Rocky Hill application is to reject it outright.

Gloucester is a beautiful tranquil area which has a valuable tourist presence. To allow a mine so close to this precious part of NSW is foolhardy in the extreme. There is not a "possiblity" of water contamination of the drinking water for 80,000 people - it is a certainty. Earthquakes in California have been moving east concurrently with the development of mines and fracking. This will obviously happen here too despite all the denials. To deliberately create these preventable disasters for the sake of short term gain for a few is outrageous and must not be allowed to happen. There is no place for this mine in this area.

Re:
Rocky Hill Coal Project - Application No SSD-5156
Stratford Coal Extension Project - Application No SSD - 4966 MOD1

Dear Sir/Madam,

I oppose the Rocky Hill Coal Project and Stratford Mine modification on the following grounds:

1. Proximity to residential areas
The mine is proposed only 900metres from the residential area of Forbesdale. These residents will carry an unacceptable burden and will be impacted by dust, noise and loss of amenity, resulting in risks to their health and loss of property value.

2. Impacts on Health
Health impacts from open-cut coalmines are well documented. With most of Gloucester township, including the hospital and schools, falling within the 5km health impact zone of the Rocky Hill mine, this places a large percentage of the population at risk. Those most affected by the health impacts are the very young, the elderly and the sick.

3. Impact on Tourism, worth $51M per annum to the Gloucester economy
An open-cut coalmine within 5km of Gloucester and within sight of the Bucketts Way will have an impact on the visual amenity of the area. The mine will risk the jobs of hundreds employed in the tourism industry.

4. Environment
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded 5 times in 4 years, with 2 floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.

This mine should not be approved, ever. They have done enough.

Yours Sincerely,

I object to the proposed open cut coal mine.
I travel regularly through Gloucester and often stop there for a break. Sometimes we stop at the Manning river enjoy the beautiful scenery or in summer take a dip in the Manning.
As a medical practitioner I am aware of the unacceptable health implications from exposure to coal dust. Respiratory diseases, are the most obvious adverse effects but effects on unborn children of coal dust exposed mothers have also been reported and many others.
Any proposal of a mine so close to residents should be straight away rejected.
The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Further risking contamination of the local water is unacceptable.
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.
The health impacts are far too great.

I object to the proposed open cut coal mine.
I travel regularly through Gloucester and often stop there for a break. Sometimes we stop at the Manning river enjoy the beautiful scenery or in summer take a dip in the Manning.
As a medical practitioner I am aware of the unacceptable health implications from exposure to coal dust. Respiratory diseases, are the most obvious adverse effects but effects on unborn children of coal dust exposed mothers have also been reported and many others.
Any proposal of a mine so close to residents should be straight away rejected.
The impacts from noise and air pollution, blasting, loss of amenity and lifestyle on surrounding residents are simply unacceptable, and in no way justified by the dubious economic arguments put forward by mine proponents.
Further risking contamination of the local water is unacceptable.
The proposed mine is on the Avon River floodplain and in the catchment area of the Manning River, which supplies drinking water to over 80,000 people. The Avon River has flooded five times in four years, with two floods occurring in 2013. There is definite potential for contamination of the water in the catchment.
The health impacts are far too great.

16th September 2016
Director - Resource Assessments
Planning Services
Dept of Planning & Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001

Submission for the Rocky Hill Coal Project - Application No SSD-5156
Stratford Coal Extension Project - Application No SSD-4966 MOD1

Dear Sir,

I strongly oppose the construction of the Rocky Hill Coal Mine.

I have been a resident of Gloucester for the past 35 years and I value the scenic beauty of the valley, especially the open agricultural land surrounding our town.

The construction of another mine in the Avon Valley will destroy this scenic beauty and lead to a dramatic drop in our thriving tourist industry and loss of employment and existing local businesses.

Previous mines claimed increased population growth, as is the Rocky Hill Mine, but as a teacher at Gloucester High School, this did not eventuate and lead to increased numbers at our school as a lot of workers lived out of town.

The proposed Rocky Hill Mine is located much too close to existing residential areas of Gloucester and the associated dust and noise from the mining and transport operations will seriously impact on the health and well being of us locals.

The changes that have been made by Gloucester Resources will not alleviate the problems of dust and will increase the problems of dust and noise associated with road transport. The promise of working only between the hours of 7am to 6pm 6 days a week is only for the first 3 years and then the hours could be extended. This will be unbearable to our whole community, but especially to those who live less than 1km from the proposed pit.

The promises of increased employment, increased mining business growth and cash handouts cannot sway my need for Gloucester to remain clean and green and as a fitting gateway to the Barrington Tops National park.

I repeat, I strongly oppose the construction of the Rocky Hill Coal Mine.

Yours sincerely,

Vicki Coombes

(I have not made a reportable political donation)